Whats this forum coming to?

[Grojlach]

Ah well - I came to realise the futile nature of debating on the Internet some time ago already. Some differences in opinion are fundamental and somehow people even seem to be arguing the notion of agreeing to disagree nowadays. And seriously, isn't anyone of you, like, tired of rehashing the same arguments to the same people who respond in the same manner for months and months in a row?
I mostly stick to posting the odd news article and some light-hearted comments nowadays, or make an attempt to pull a derailed discussion back on-topic; as somehow practically any new discussion subject - whether it's about the EU voting results or accute marshmellow shortages in New Hampshire - eventually derails into yet another Middle Eastern related debate. It's not as if 90% of the topics weren't about that already anyway, or something.
The few times I'm actually goaded into a debate and people start pulling the same old dirty tricks again - pulling words out of context, twisting them into a completely different perspective, nitpicking semantics, resulting in people basically telling me what I actually meant with my post, what stereotype fits my world view the best, and what kind of person I really am, up to and including the interesting debate on what colour socks I wear - I simply quit the debate altogether. Don't care if it's "childish" or "the easy way out", but I'm done playing that game.
I used to get incredibly riled up whenever someone managed to read deeply rooted US-hate into fairly harmless and light-hearted comments, and that did reflect on my posting style on occasion - now I simply just don't care anymore, or at least pretend not to care. I'm not posting here to butt heads, I'm here to have fun and try (emphasise 'try' ) to add something valuable to a discussion - whether it's taking place in Current Events or in General Conversation. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 06-18-2004, 03:49 PM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

[Timber Loftis]

To SKUNK:

When and if you return, please accept my apology for discussing you in your absence. I don't like to do that.

To MEMSIE:

You mentioned that we should consider how we would debate with others face-to-face. Let me explain part of my point-of-view on this forum and online debating generally.

First, I often debate with my secretary, a hard-line conservative, but it doesn't last long at all -- because the office walls are thin and despite the fact she's 65, she's still not real good at using her "inside voice." Second, a heated debate face-to-face gets outta hand too quickly, what with snap arguments back and forth -- non-sequiters are always brought in.

In a written debate you can consider a post, maybe research, and come back at it with a reply. Because we are typing and not screaming, we can get really heated about something without looking like stark raving loonies to those sitting next to us in the real world.

I LIKE these aspects of online debate, particularly where there are some general groundrules to keep at least a modicum of civility -- as with IWF.

So, for me, the direct comparrison to RL in-face debating doesn't ring so true.

In the end I think we can all agree we come here to see OTHER viewpoints and arguments. If you were all like me, I wouldn't like you very much. [img]graemlins/heee.gif[/img]

[Mouse]

And there we have it - in this thread, there has beeen more sense talked than in the majority of those preceding.

We dont want to stifle debate, and we certainly dont want to become an anodyne corner of the internet where only the PC Gods run riot. However, you all must realise that this place is not an unmoderated free for all and act accordingly.

We dont have all the answers, and we are not all beyond reproach. All we ask is that you accept that we are doing the best we can. If you can all act with a reasonable degree of restraint and decorum, it makes our lives so much more pleasant

Ummm...actually [img]smile.gif[/img] It hasn't changed all that much around here.

[Mouse]

Originally posted by MagiK: Ummm...actually [img]smile.gif[/img] It hasn't changed all that much around here.

Work with me here, I'm trying to be moderate...

LOL ok Im sorry Mouse [img]smile.gif[/img] Moderate away [img]smile.gif[/img] Really just thought I would weigh in with my impressions after a hiatus. Altho to be honest Im still notin a position that I can spend any real time here.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by shamrock_uk: To take the example you used in your first post Chewie, some people do believe that homosexual behaviour is contrary to nature and immoral. If you define immorality by reference to God, then people who adopt a particular strict Biblical interpretation for example could certainly believe this, and its not against the rules to put forward this type of view, providing its not a personal attack on another person. If you find topics like this upsetting or offensive, then you can vote with your feet and not look at the thread. (Edits and additions for clarity)

Perhaps we can vote with our feet, or we can vote with our words. I wont walk away from a person or persons being abused in the guise of righteousnous or out of ignorance. No, I challenge such behavior head-on.

I have never met a gay person ( and I know quite a few) who is not insulted by the notion that people refer to them as 'an abombination of God.' or "unnatural" or mentally ill. Using that language in general to refer to gay people is as personally insulting as refering to jews as sub-human or to blacks as 1/5 a person.

Face it- being called directly or indirectly (that is personally or in general) an abombination of God, unnatural and/or mentally ill is degrading no matter how you slice it. If using degrading language is not against the rules, then whats the point of having rules? I won't vote with my feet, but with my words.

[ 06-18-2004, 10:31 PM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]

[Chewbacca]

For what its worth (if anything at this point) I have nothing but kind words and appreciation for the moderater team and the admin.

Starting this thread was not a complaint of their service in any way shape or form and I regret if it has been taken that way.

Keep up the good work and thanks.

[Dirty Meg]

[quote]Originally posted by Timber Loftis:

Ask yourself this: if someone on the forum were to say ?I support the terrorists and I hope they kick the crap out of America which is too big for its britches? would you think that a bannable/punishable statement?

Not really, no. People are entitled to express their beliefs, however abhorent. Just as you are free to support violence against Iraq, anyone perverse enough to support arbitrary violence against the US is entitled to do so.

[ 06-18-2004, 11:33 PM: Message edited by: Dirty Meg ]

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by shamrock_uk: What Timber said. If Skunk felt offended, he would have been free to report the comments TL made. The mods would have asked for an end and TL would have stopped. (Vice versa of course for when the opposite occurs)

Its a slippery slope when one person is allowed to make insulting remarks towards another. How do we draw the line about what is acceptable and what is not when an insult can pass simply because it can explainified and extrapolated from a persons political opinion or becasue the person on the recieving end doesnt mind?

I agree with skunk alot on these issues in these posts of forum past that have been called into question as """proof""" that skunk is a terror supporter. Does that make me a terror supporter as well? If skunk doesn't mind being called one, I SURE THE HELL DO.

If you disagree with U.S forign policy and Isreali policy in the occupied lands than that automaticcaly make you a supporter of OBL? If trying to understand and explain why so many people hate your nation and way of life that somehow makes you a supporter of wanton death and carnage?

It is clear that calling skunk, and vicariously ME a terror supporter is nothing more than an insult and an argument by ad hominem. Its simply avoiding debating the issues by resorting to petty insults and namecalling.


And Yes, it would take a clear and direct call for support for me to deem the the label 'terror supporter' justified.

Also, I wont speak for skunk, but I plainly recall that he stated unequivocally that he is not a terror supporter and that he finds the violence and death caused by terrorist as tragic as the rest of us.

[ 06-18-2004, 11:32 PM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]