Religion, a little problem on our hands?

[Guest123_x1]

it's a bit different

It was filled up with sex topics, flaming from one side of the thread to the other.

I haven't seen too many sexual topics on the Buzzboard's Political Potpourri, but I'm going to ask MW to see what he has to say about sexual topics in the Political Potpourri.
As for the flaming, if it gets out of control, when MW gets around to it, he deletes the bad thread, and bans the offending user (though it may take days to get to it. People like me are admittedly fool enough to think it's entertainment)

The following is from the Buzzboard's Rules page-

You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time should they see fit. As a user you agree to any information you have entered above being stored in a database. While this information will not be disclosed to any third party without your consent the webmaster, administrator and moderators cannot be held responsible for any hacking attempt that may lead to the data being compromised.

-ottermi619-
As I sign off this post here, I've sent MW a P.M. about sexual topics in his Political Potpourri, and am waiting for a response. I'll reply here again with his response.



UPDATE: Here is a summary of MW's response:
Mark has had no complaints of topics being "too sexual in nature" in the Potpourri in who knows how long.
However, there has been some excessive flaming incidents here & there, but he thinks most people realize that political debates, by their very nature, can get heated & personal. When a certain line is crossed, he will act as soon as he finds out about extreme occurrences.

 

[Supreme Edgeboy Max]

Ok I'd just like to know why this whole Religion ban is wanted. Because you get flamed? Because everyone hates you after? Something along them lines? If so then don't post in the thread.
Maybe we should also ban game topics because if you get a bunch of Sony and Nintendo fanboys in the same thread then fur will fly. I guess next on the list is EdgeBoy starting a thread banning game topics because flaming happens, after the thread is over everyone hates each other.
If a whole topic gets banned from PC then I'd like another reason other then "Flaming and being disliked".
There is nothing in the rules about disliking someone or blocking them (I'm talking about the ignored list). If I don't want to talk to Kaga because he likes Dell and I like HP does that mean he can run off and want to ban all computer topics? No, same thing here. Sure flames might happens, but if anyone took a little time to read the rules then they'd find that flaming someone is breaking the rules. Someone reports them, they get a warning and everyone is happy.

v_v What, can't I bring a topic up if I've not been involved in it? Look, nobody's flamed me about religion other than one staff member who eventually apologized. I won't actually care about being flamed but its the flaming that occurs. Eh, you can just prevent it all by disallowing discussions of it. Games are games, but religion is a more serious topic.

Fine, you want more reasons? Here you go.
Flaming.
Hatred.
Grudges, especially dangerous in the case of staff.
Unfriendlyness publicly between members.
One member tells other members to ignore/hate another member.
Racial/religion discrimination. Unlikely but possible.
Gang up on other members to simply annoy them because of hate/discrimination.
Spam through PM.
As a result of annoying, members may feel unwanted and find entire groups/communities unfriendly.
Lack of common sense in users in these discussions: probably always somehow or the other heading for arguments.
Arguments coming out of simple questions that may even minorly relate to religion.


Eh, I'll post more when I come up with them. Just the possibilities of what can happen from religion topics should be enough .. ^_^

 

[Spectrum]

Eh, I'll post more when I come up with them. Just the possibilities of what can happen from religion topics should be enough .. ^_^

You don't make a suggestion and think of reasons for it later, that's not how a suggestion works. In addition, none of these reasons are valid, I'll go through them and explain why. If you want to convince me, I'd like evidence first.

Flaming.

All flaming involved in debates ceased when the Thunderdome was removed.

Hatred.

See above.

Grudges, especially dangerous in the case of staff.

None of this has ever occured.

Unfriendlyness publicly between members.

This occurs from time to time, but never as a result of a religious debate. It's a lack of maturity on the member's part.

One member tells other members to ignore/hate another member.

This occurs quite frequently, but as with the above reason, never because of a religious debate.

Racial/religion discrimination. Unlikely but possible.

If it hasn't occured, then it isn't a reason.

Gang up on other members to simply annoy them because of hate/discrimination.

Has never occured.

Spam through PM.

I don't see how this involves religious discrimination.

As a result of annoying, members may feel unwanted and find entire groups/communities unfriendly.

This is a viable reason, however, as pathetic as it may sound, this is a warnable offense, so it doesn't count.

Lack of common sense in users in these discussions: probably always somehow or the other heading for arguments.

If a debater lacks common sense, it will occur in every debate, not just religious ones.

Arguments coming out of simple questions that may even minorly relate to religion.

None of this has occured.

 

[Supreme Edgeboy Max]

You don't make a suggestion and think of reasons for it later, that's not how a suggestion works. In addition, none of these reasons are valid, I'll go through them and explain why. If you want to convince me, I'd like evidence first.


All flaming involved in debates ceased when the Thunderdome was removed.

I'm not talking about the past. Like yeah, haven't you seen that thread? v_v

None of this has ever occured.

Doesn't mean it will not.


This occurs from time to time, but never as a result of a religious debate. It's a lack of maturity on the member's part.

Lacking of maturity = something or the other WILL start sometime, unless its ended early - by staff means or ANYTHING.

This occurs quite frequently, but as with the above reason, never because of a religious debate.

Doesn't mean it will not.

If it hasn't occured, then it isn't a reason.

DOESN'T MEAN IT WILL NOT.

Has never occured.

DOESN'T MEAN IT WILL NOT.

I don't see how this involves religious discrimination.

Someone may come along and PM "OMG you don't believe in God how can you do that etc. etc." to others which may be annoying in ways.

This is a viable reason, however, as pathetic as it may sound, this is a warnable offense, so it doesn't count.

Yeshers, however it occurs, someone will be warned. Restriction will prevent that.

If a debater lacks common sense, it will occur in every debate, not just religious ones.

Eh .. lets say people tend to get more jumpy over religion than other things?

None of this has occured.

Doesn't mean it won't.

So there. My opinions in bold. You're thinking about the past, not about the future Ty..

 

[Ryoutarou]

And...? Banning an entire topic such as religion is pointless. If someone goes too far, they'll be warned and eventually banned if it happens to go that far. If someone were to PM members in the way that you said, that's harassment, that's worth a warning. We're not going to punish the whole for a few bad actions. That happened to T-Dome because there was literally no good discussion coming from that, other than sex. Which shows just how "mature" half of the members are.

 

[John Denver]

All right kids, come gather round good ol Grandpa Johnny. He's gonna tell you a story.

There once was an S-mod named Dakota. Dakota wanted good plans for PC and he loved good debates, so he thought that PC should have a mature forum. He went to the staff and said that we should start a forum called "The T-Dome" (short for Thunderdome). He believed that the T-Dome would be great, because it would give a chance for the debate-loving members to finally have a forum where they can discuss any major topic they wanted. He also believe that PC would be mature enough to have a structured, clean debate environment. But the T-dome would need rules of course.

Dakota set down the basic rules. All of PC's original rules must be followed, with the exception of "No religious or political topics or sex-oriented." The staff would also be much, much stricter about flaming. With these obvious rules in play, Dakota knew for certain that this wonderful new forum would flourish with mature topics and rancor free debates. He also knew that PC members were mature enough to be calm and collective when it came to controversial debates. Dakota was sadly mistaken.

Even though Dakota had clearly set up rules and guidelines for what could be discussed in the T-Dome, no one seemed to want to follow them. There were constantly little kids in the T-dome wanting to post the most perverted topics ever, and they thought they were cool because of it. There was perpetual flaming all the time! No topic seemed to be safe from the nooBs and their point of view!

Dakota had to do something. His dream for the T-dome and a mature PC had gone down in flames with all the uncontrollable noobs running a muck. The only possible way to stop the stupid members was to destroy the T-dome istelf! How ironic, that the person who wanted so much for the T-dome to flourish was the very person who had it removed from PC.

So the moral of the story is this: Try as we might, and deny it as we might, PC is overall an immature forum, making it impossible for mature topics to go around without some idiot coming in and ruining it for everybody.

 

[MegaLightBlaze]

Man, I just wish that half the people a PC wern't flaming immature people who can't take a serious discussion...
Man, T board revival would be awsome.

 

[Chairman Kaga]

"Doesn't mean it won't"....

Do you have ANY idea how paranoid you sound? You're basing all of your negative comments on the staff on not only hypothetical situations, but future hypothetical statements. Who died and made you PC Nostradamus? Who gave you this magical ability to fortell all the evils and atrocities of the PC staff that haven't yet happened? It's your own incredible arrogance, the feeling that since you're whistleblowing or complaining or condemning, basically railing against us for the sake of railing against us, that is deluding you into thinking that you have some type of infallable moral authority over us. It's classic megalomania! You're the leader of a revolution that doesn't exist and with every post you're just digging yourself deeper and deeper into a hole of irrational thought and unfounded, malicious suspicion. Being wronged by a single member of a much larger entity DOES NOT give you the right to accuse us all of being immature and biased. Have you realized in your long tenure on PC that since we have uppers of all opinions that we have CHECKS AND BALANCES? That no one mod can act in a rogue manner because they'll be overruled if we determine that the move wasn't impartial? We're the ones battling immature members; it's not the other way around like in your righteous fantasy.

And not only that, but do you know how incredibly vain it is to actually convince yourself and continually attempt to convince others that the entire PC staff is plotting against you? What makes you so special that we would focus the entire mass of our malevolence upon you? Basically what you're saying is that we're always partying in HQ over some new way that we've screwed you over. Your entire post is flamebait against the mods; you want us to completely lose it against you so you can get some sense of personal justification because you just can't stand that we have policy that we control and you don't. I am not flaming, mind you; it's just that sugarcoating our displeasure isn't working anymore, and you need to know the truth the way the truth sounds. Give it a rest; you're no more special than anyone else; in fact, your paranoia makes us less likely to take anything you say seriously because of how often you go on your tirades and how often your posts are centered around yourself and not PC as a whole. So, unless you have any PROOF that we have conspired to or successfully wronged you in the past or the present; forgive me for being so blunt, put up or shut up.

 

[John Denver]

Man, I just wish that half the people a PC wern't flaming immature people who can't take a serious discussion...
Man, T board revival would be awsome.

Good job on not even reading my post...

 

[Ryoutarou]

So this is about as far as this topic can go without people repeating themselves over and over again. The religious discussions won't be banned, but any members seen flaming about it will be warned.