- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: So what would be the rules/guidelines of a Religion & Philosophy Board?
Posted on 4/29/12 at 9:57 am to L.A.
Posted on 4/29/12 at 9:57 am to L.A.
quote:
Exactly, but how are you going to keep them out?
Restrict their RA privileges, and then ban them if they continue to go to the board and complain rather than ignoring it.
0
Posted on 4/29/12 at 11:30 am to theunknownknight
quote:
The irony is this thread is the most I've agreed with atheists on this site so if it is any indication, the people who would actually post on the new board would get along. The ones bickering here consist of those who wouldn't post on it anyway.
correct. awhile back plenty atheists and myself were in agreement to keep things on the poli-talk or get a new board if chicken would approve. The religious and atheists who partake in those threads are NOT the ones bitching. Like GeauxTiger and myself have said, if you do not like the topic then stay out and do not post!
Do you see everyone here complaining that the OT is a cesspool posting there all the time? i doubt it. They stay away. Same should have been done by those bitching about religion on the poli-board when the user guidleines clearly allowed it to be discussed.
This post was edited on 4/29/12 at 11:32 am
Posted on 4/29/12 at 12:01 pm to Athanasius
quote:Totally agree with this. I just wish we could see an "Oops, we messed up. Religion can be talked about again on the Poli Board. It won't happen again."
B)all Religious talk should be in the Political board where all the other liberal/conservative debates happen. It seems like that is it's natural home
Posted on 4/29/12 at 4:57 pm to Fat Bastard
quote:
Do you see everyone here complaining that the OT is a cesspool posting there all the time? i doubt it. They stay away. Same should have been done by those bitching about religion on the poli-board when the user guidleines clearly allowed it to be discussed.
This is a terrible argument. The whole main issue is whether it should be discussed on the Poli Board, and the whole "you don't have to look at it" angle is overplayed and ridiculous. Taking that to its logical conclusion, nobody should propose any rules about content at all, which sort of makes you wonder why we have separated boards.
People do flame and troll the Poli Talk board about religion too much, and those threads should not be allowed there. That's just common sense.
As for the proposed new board, I don't know where I stand anymore. I had in my head this idea that we could have a more serious board than the Poli Board where trivial issues and stupid spam threads would be greatly diminished. Maybe I'm being unrealistic.
But whatever the new board becomes (or doesn't become), I sure as shite don't want to see a bunch of spambot Colonel Toddy style threads on it. And that goes for the pro-religious posters too. I don't want to see a bunch of personal anecdotes or current event threads based on how some Christian high school in Indiana was mean to a gay kid, or how some church in Oregon did something nice for a returning veteran.
For the record, I am in favor of removing those threads to the OT.
Posted on 4/29/12 at 6:36 pm to Doc Fenton
quote:
This is a terrible argument.
nope, not at all
quote:
and the whole "you don't have to look at it" angle is overplayed and ridiculous.
nope, that goes for any board here which is why i used the CESSPOOL as an example. plenty stay away because it is just that. You do not likey, do not readey or postey. real simple.
quote:
I sure as shite don't want to see a bunch of spambot Colonel Toddy style threads on it.
yeah, well to be fair to both sides whether trashy, untrue or just opinion from the toddy types it very well may be that way.
quote:
And that goes for the pro-religious posters too.
???? I thought this board was to discuss religion if chicken makes it. all types. WTH are you expecting? If you do not want to talk religion then just stay out of the discussion then. again, real simple.
This post was edited on 4/29/12 at 6:38 pm
Posted on 4/29/12 at 7:03 pm to Fat Bastard
quote:
plenty stay away because it is just that.
Chicken just specifically asked us to brainstorm on what rules we would want for a new board, and here you are telling us that all complaints and suggestions about what should be allowed or disallowed are illegitimate whining?
I think you are completely missing the whole point of this thread. Rules are made to cater to the preferences of the board's users. If it works best to have rules set up a certain way, then they should be set up that way. You can't just dismiss any complaint about the current application of rules, or the rules themselves, just because everyone is free not to post. That's moronic reasoning.
quote:
You do not likey, do not readey or postey. real simple.
Again. Don't be an a-hole just to be an a-hole.
quote:
I thought this board was to discuss religion if chicken makes it. all types. WTH are you expecting? If you do not want to talk religion then just stay out of the discussion then. again, real simple.
Like I already wrote, I was against creating a board with "religion" in the title, because I think it would give the impression that all threads related to religion should go to that board. Now I don't know anymore. Maybe it could work anyway, maybe it couldn't. But what I don't want is a bunch of trolling and spam.
Have you read any of this thread? Are you up to date on any of the arguments being presented here for how the rules should or shouldn't be? Stop telling everybody how "simple" everything is when you refuse to put any effort into trying to understand what's being posted.
Posted on 4/29/12 at 7:32 pm to Gmorgan4982
quote:
Totally agree with this. I just wish we could see an "Oops, we messed up. Religion can be talked about again on the Poli Board. It won't happen again.
Why is that?
Perhaps someone can fill me in on why did Religion get banned from PT? Why was it moved to OT? Why was it moved from there? Is it banned altogether now? Is it true getting it's own Religious board is it's only hope to have such talk anywhere? And if so, why would someone think that way?
Sorry, I am not a regular and Chicken's OP did not explain things. And I tried to understand in this longer thread, skimming, but it was confusing to understand what had happened, what caused things, what changes have happened, what's going on. Why this drastic need for a Religion board.
As a non regular, imo, why can't just normal rules apply, put Religion and Philosophy speech in with PT as they are are basically the same thing. And just maybe create a Sticky in that room that says, "warning- different people hold different beliefs. If some of these beliefs hurt your feelings then perhaps you should not read the posts." And then just warn, then ban the most terrible offenders if problems arise as per TD rules, imo.
Posted on 4/29/12 at 7:48 pm to Athanasius
This is what I wrote on pg. 6:
I'm not sure what the history of complaints is, but my hunch is that there are a bunch of people who want to talk politics who get tired of the religious wars. It's a "not this shite again" phenomenon, and yes, it can get distracting.
Personally, I had no problem with the periodic crackdown policy, but I can see where some would feel the inconsistency (depending on whatever stage of the policing cycle we were in) was unfair.
Many in this thread are critical of removing any religion-based threads to the OT, (1) because they know those threads die fast over there where they are generally hated, and (2) they want to work their schtick on the Political Talk board, given that they are apathetic about actual politics, ironically enough.
In addition to the two camps of people who want religious bickering off/on the Political Talk board, there is a 3rd group of people who want a new board devoted to random discussion about religion. (Although I guess this group blends in with those who want religion threads moved to the OT, and don't care whether a new board is created or not.)
There also seems to be a very small contingent of posters, a 4th group consisting perhaps of just myself, who dream of a more philosophically-oriented board centered around philosophy, science, morality, and the evolution of human morality under various religious systems and worldviews. But maybe I'm being incoherent. As much as I hate being inundated with threads based on personal anecdotes or random news stories from the day, they seem to go with the territory of any board you could possibly create.
So, in conclusion, I have a vague notion that a new board is needed, but I still don't know what the rules should be about dividing up religious-based threads among the OT, Political Talk, and new boards.
quote:
It goes in cycles. You'd be surprised at how much the PoliBoard can get inundated with religious threads at times. There have been stretches of a few days at a time when roughly half the threads on the first page constituted fights about religion.
With the periodic waves of religious spam have come periodic crackdowns by admins. It's a system that works pretty well, but it does lack consistency. For those who demand consistency from the admins, new rules for allocating particular threads to particular boards are needed.
I'm not sure what the history of complaints is, but my hunch is that there are a bunch of people who want to talk politics who get tired of the religious wars. It's a "not this shite again" phenomenon, and yes, it can get distracting.
Personally, I had no problem with the periodic crackdown policy, but I can see where some would feel the inconsistency (depending on whatever stage of the policing cycle we were in) was unfair.
Many in this thread are critical of removing any religion-based threads to the OT, (1) because they know those threads die fast over there where they are generally hated, and (2) they want to work their schtick on the Political Talk board, given that they are apathetic about actual politics, ironically enough.
In addition to the two camps of people who want religious bickering off/on the Political Talk board, there is a 3rd group of people who want a new board devoted to random discussion about religion. (Although I guess this group blends in with those who want religion threads moved to the OT, and don't care whether a new board is created or not.)
There also seems to be a very small contingent of posters, a 4th group consisting perhaps of just myself, who dream of a more philosophically-oriented board centered around philosophy, science, morality, and the evolution of human morality under various religious systems and worldviews. But maybe I'm being incoherent. As much as I hate being inundated with threads based on personal anecdotes or random news stories from the day, they seem to go with the territory of any board you could possibly create.
So, in conclusion, I have a vague notion that a new board is needed, but I still don't know what the rules should be about dividing up religious-based threads among the OT, Political Talk, and new boards.
Posted on 4/29/12 at 7:59 pm to Athanasius
quote:
put Religion and Philosophy speech in with PT as they are are basically the same thing.
And for the record, this is definitely not true.
The only people who think this way are the ones who don't care about anything actually happening in politics, but yet still want to be involved with political discussions.
Except at that point it's not really political discussion anymore in the conventional sense. It becomes about philosophy, sociological commentary, ideology, and religion, rather than caring about actual politicians or official political actions.
Posted on 4/29/12 at 8:09 pm to Doc Fenton
quote:
but I still don't know what the rules should be about dividing up religious-based threads among the OT, Political Talk, and new boards.
I don't think this is something that should be mandated. Posting trends naturally evolved to ultimately establish a precedent. For years, in depth discussion has always been naturally relegated to Political Talk - ie, discussions pertaining to evolution, abiogenesis, consciousness, free will, biblical inconsistencies, Church doctrines, etc. Most other discussions naturally found their way to the OT. It worked for years, and not because it was mandated and policed, but simply because that's the way posting trends evolved. Complex philosophical discussions were hosted on the Political Talk board. Lighter content was found on the OT. It just worked, largely because of the types of people that frequent each board.
This post was edited on 4/29/12 at 8:11 pm
Posted on 4/29/12 at 8:16 pm to Doc Fenton
quote:
Doc Fenton
Thanks for your time responding to my questions.
Posted on 4/29/12 at 8:29 pm to Cs
Well that's fine I guess, except that "in depth discussion" =/= religious threads, which is what the recent problem has become. People saw over time that the PT board became the destination for religious discussions, and so it attracted a lot of nonserious threads under the rationale of "hey, they let other religious threads stay here, so why not mine?"
Also, I know that there are some posters like Spirit of Dunson who actually prefer participating in those in depth threads when they are on the OT--well, at least for the "abiogenesis, consciousness, free will" parts. And sometimes those threads DO work over there. It's just difficult because the traffic over there moves so quickly.
I still don't know where I stand on all this, but I'm pretty sure that I don't want to see threads about "I just dated a Creationist last night" or "what's the deal with the Healing Place Church?" on the Poli Talk board.
Yes, the informal rules evolved for a reason, but the admins have run into a problem trying to explain the division of material based on whether it is "religious" or not, because that's not really the reason why they are sent one place or the other.
So OT people feel like they are getting stuffed with PT threads, and PT people feel like they are getting stuffed with OT threads, and both boards have problems with it. Thus, from this perspective, the creation of an alternative board makes tons of sense.
My part in all this is to try to avoid having all the stupid spam get moved to the new alternative board, because I really want an alternative board without dumb trivial nonsense. Now, however, I realize that I'm probably being unrealistic.
What we need now are some workable rules for when it's okay to have controversial religious threads moved from board X to board Y. I don't know what the right answer is, and I'm not 100% sure that the old system might not be the best one, but some of the arguments being made in this thread are just thoughtlessly simplistic.
Also, I know that there are some posters like Spirit of Dunson who actually prefer participating in those in depth threads when they are on the OT--well, at least for the "abiogenesis, consciousness, free will" parts. And sometimes those threads DO work over there. It's just difficult because the traffic over there moves so quickly.
I still don't know where I stand on all this, but I'm pretty sure that I don't want to see threads about "I just dated a Creationist last night" or "what's the deal with the Healing Place Church?" on the Poli Talk board.
Yes, the informal rules evolved for a reason, but the admins have run into a problem trying to explain the division of material based on whether it is "religious" or not, because that's not really the reason why they are sent one place or the other.
So OT people feel like they are getting stuffed with PT threads, and PT people feel like they are getting stuffed with OT threads, and both boards have problems with it. Thus, from this perspective, the creation of an alternative board makes tons of sense.
My part in all this is to try to avoid having all the stupid spam get moved to the new alternative board, because I really want an alternative board without dumb trivial nonsense. Now, however, I realize that I'm probably being unrealistic.
What we need now are some workable rules for when it's okay to have controversial religious threads moved from board X to board Y. I don't know what the right answer is, and I'm not 100% sure that the old system might not be the best one, but some of the arguments being made in this thread are just thoughtlessly simplistic.
Posted on 4/29/12 at 8:35 pm to Doc Fenton
quote:
put Religion and Philosophy speech in with PT as they are are basically the same thing.
And for the record, this is definitely not true.
I think it is true very much. However I do not want to start a debate here as this is the help board not the new political/philosophical/religious board.
Posted on 4/29/12 at 8:43 pm to Athanasius
But the very help being asked for here is how to make such distinctions!
Posted on 4/29/12 at 8:44 pm to Doc Fenton
quote:
But the very help being asked for here is how to make such distinctions!
I know: I was just playing.
Posted on 4/29/12 at 8:58 pm to Athanasius
By the way, I think I'm going to step back a little bit from my earlier misgivings about putting "religion" in the new board's title. I think that a "Philosophy, Science, & Religion Board" could work, but that the admins would have to make it very clear that some religious threads could still go to the PT or the OT, depending on their content.
For the PT, I think the rule would have to be that the political tie-in would have to be to an actual official action or proposed law/bill. Merely saying "religious nuts are what is wrong with our politics" or "churches are all corrupt and should not get a tax exemption" should not allow you to post that thread on the PT board. You should tie it in with a specific policy action or campaign taking place, or at least to specific recent comments by a person in national office.
For the new board, the only requirement should be that you are striving for serious and thoughtful discussion on a topic rather than making a flame or playing a game of "gotcha!" with a recent embarrassing or socially/politically controversial news story. As an example, one of Wiki's threads with data and graphs building a case for why religion is becoming obsolete would be just fine.
For the OT board, if your thread gets too serious, just know that it will be in danger of being moved to the new board.
That's my first draft proposal of what the new rules could be.
Fire away if you disagree!
For the PT, I think the rule would have to be that the political tie-in would have to be to an actual official action or proposed law/bill. Merely saying "religious nuts are what is wrong with our politics" or "churches are all corrupt and should not get a tax exemption" should not allow you to post that thread on the PT board. You should tie it in with a specific policy action or campaign taking place, or at least to specific recent comments by a person in national office.
For the new board, the only requirement should be that you are striving for serious and thoughtful discussion on a topic rather than making a flame or playing a game of "gotcha!" with a recent embarrassing or socially/politically controversial news story. As an example, one of Wiki's threads with data and graphs building a case for why religion is becoming obsolete would be just fine.
For the OT board, if your thread gets too serious, just know that it will be in danger of being moved to the new board.
That's my first draft proposal of what the new rules could be.
Fire away if you disagree!
Posted on 4/29/12 at 10:36 pm to Doc Fenton
quote:
I think the rule would have to be that the political tie-in would have to be to an actual official action or proposed law/bill.
I want to be able to provide counter point to actual statements.
The Pope and Bishops are going to have the pulpit. Santorum or his ilk will operate to do their duty as they see it, to advance the Will of the Lord as they understand it.
We already get inundated by a few Catholics posting a recent formal statement by local or world wide authorities in their sect.
There are hundreds of millions of Catholics, employing a vast staff to turn out materials and speeches supporting their points of view.
Posted on 4/29/12 at 10:49 pm to Doc Fenton
With all due respect, with all your examples, as well as examples that others have given, when showing religious examples you always cast the ones that attack the Church, God, the Bible, and say they should be allowed ect.
Atheist's have removed God from their life. Atheist desire that God be removed from all politics, the schools, and the public forum too. Atheist's whose mission it is to attack Biblical Concepts and anything of God are quite zealous in this task. And they are quite prevalent on this website and attempting to do so. Such does not bother me in the slightest with these Atheist aggressions for I know the Truth and can easily defend it. However when a civil Christian tries to offer threads that Atheist's do not like they cannot stand it and they boil over and make a fit.
I can easily see Admins attempting to curb obvious flames. However those on the Left claim to "Celebrate Diversity" and desire "Tolerance". However if the Truth may be known; once someone comes along and shares a Biblical understanding which is opposite to their viewpoint such people on the Left cannot handle such "Diversity" of thought and are indeed the most "Intolerant" of it because that just does not fit their obvious agenda. They will easily attempt to curb Free Speech if it opposes their views.
True Biblical Christians are in the greatest of minorities on this website, which is fine. And long-held Christian viewpoints are in the vast minority on any forum in this website. And the most vocal enemies unto Christianity are Witches, Atheist and Homosexuals. It is no great shock as to why that is as Scripture speaks out against all 3 quite plainly.
And when on any PT, or OT board, or on any such future Philosophical/Religious board to which the Christians that know God's word well see Gay Propaganda, The Religion of Atheism aggressively pushed, or the New Age Religion of Mother Earth Worship, or other such Witchcraft attempting to deceive, will such Admins and others in the new board "Tolerate" the "Diversity" of free thoughts of viewpoints that even appose their own? Or will there be attempts to curb any such respectful Free Speech?
So is this a purpose to remove civil, peaceful, defense of Biblical Understandings of World View from the PT, or OT? And is the free thoughts of the Defense of Christianity going to be attempted to be snuffed out in this new Philosophy/Religion Board?
Atheist's have removed God from their life. Atheist desire that God be removed from all politics, the schools, and the public forum too. Atheist's whose mission it is to attack Biblical Concepts and anything of God are quite zealous in this task. And they are quite prevalent on this website and attempting to do so. Such does not bother me in the slightest with these Atheist aggressions for I know the Truth and can easily defend it. However when a civil Christian tries to offer threads that Atheist's do not like they cannot stand it and they boil over and make a fit.
I can easily see Admins attempting to curb obvious flames. However those on the Left claim to "Celebrate Diversity" and desire "Tolerance". However if the Truth may be known; once someone comes along and shares a Biblical understanding which is opposite to their viewpoint such people on the Left cannot handle such "Diversity" of thought and are indeed the most "Intolerant" of it because that just does not fit their obvious agenda. They will easily attempt to curb Free Speech if it opposes their views.
True Biblical Christians are in the greatest of minorities on this website, which is fine. And long-held Christian viewpoints are in the vast minority on any forum in this website. And the most vocal enemies unto Christianity are Witches, Atheist and Homosexuals. It is no great shock as to why that is as Scripture speaks out against all 3 quite plainly.
And when on any PT, or OT board, or on any such future Philosophical/Religious board to which the Christians that know God's word well see Gay Propaganda, The Religion of Atheism aggressively pushed, or the New Age Religion of Mother Earth Worship, or other such Witchcraft attempting to deceive, will such Admins and others in the new board "Tolerate" the "Diversity" of free thoughts of viewpoints that even appose their own? Or will there be attempts to curb any such respectful Free Speech?
So is this a purpose to remove civil, peaceful, defense of Biblical Understandings of World View from the PT, or OT? And is the free thoughts of the Defense of Christianity going to be attempted to be snuffed out in this new Philosophy/Religion Board?
Posted on 4/29/12 at 11:28 pm to Athanasius
I'm not sure if I followed everything you were trying to communicate in that post, but just to get to what I take to be the main points in the last 2 questions:
To some extent. In the Christian world, there's a role for communities of like-minded people trying to collaborate and debate on issues to gain a better understanding of them (see the original university system that developed from earlier monastic schools), and there's a role for preaching to the worldly. On this website, we have separate boards for people who share common interests that they want to discuss. I suppose there is a role for preaching as well (see TulaneLSU on the OT), but for the most part the big idea here is to create boards where people can peruse or quickly scan pages of threads and be interested rather than annoyed. Interested people continue to participate and draw traffic. Annoyed and frustrated people go away.
I'm sure it's fine to remind people on the PT board from time to time of the Christian underpinnings of Western civilization and our system of government (or to give Christian-based advice when people come with the inevitable "what should I do?" threads on the OT), but if you want to go into detail about defending the Christian faith for the sake of defending the Christian faith, perhaps that's best sequestered to a specific location.
I don't foresee this happening, either from the admins or from the atheist posters.
There will of course be mocking and jokes and stuff like that, but I think for the most part that atheists and theists will largely "talk past one another" on the hypothetical new board.
There was a time a couple of years back when I was very much interested in debating reasons for atheism vs. theism. I've sort of moved beyond that to wanting to explore more specific dogmatic issues, but (1) those debates were greatly helpful to me in the past, and I think they would be even better on a new board more amenable to them, and (2) I still enjoy valuable contributions made by atheists on other subjects concerning philosophy, consciousness, the existence of true altruism, cosmology, etc.
quote:
So is this a purpose to remove civil, peaceful, defense of Biblical Understandings of World View from the PT, or OT?
To some extent. In the Christian world, there's a role for communities of like-minded people trying to collaborate and debate on issues to gain a better understanding of them (see the original university system that developed from earlier monastic schools), and there's a role for preaching to the worldly. On this website, we have separate boards for people who share common interests that they want to discuss. I suppose there is a role for preaching as well (see TulaneLSU on the OT), but for the most part the big idea here is to create boards where people can peruse or quickly scan pages of threads and be interested rather than annoyed. Interested people continue to participate and draw traffic. Annoyed and frustrated people go away.
I'm sure it's fine to remind people on the PT board from time to time of the Christian underpinnings of Western civilization and our system of government (or to give Christian-based advice when people come with the inevitable "what should I do?" threads on the OT), but if you want to go into detail about defending the Christian faith for the sake of defending the Christian faith, perhaps that's best sequestered to a specific location.
quote:
And is the free thoughts of the Defense of Christianity going to be attempted to be snuffed out in this new Philosophy/Religion Board?
I don't foresee this happening, either from the admins or from the atheist posters.
There will of course be mocking and jokes and stuff like that, but I think for the most part that atheists and theists will largely "talk past one another" on the hypothetical new board.
There was a time a couple of years back when I was very much interested in debating reasons for atheism vs. theism. I've sort of moved beyond that to wanting to explore more specific dogmatic issues, but (1) those debates were greatly helpful to me in the past, and I think they would be even better on a new board more amenable to them, and (2) I still enjoy valuable contributions made by atheists on other subjects concerning philosophy, consciousness, the existence of true altruism, cosmology, etc.
Posted on 4/29/12 at 11:32 pm to ottothewise
quote:
I want to be able to provide counter point to actual statements.
Otto, it's fine for you to post counterpoints or create threads about why GDP should be replaced by "gross national happiness."
Just move your non-political threads about why it's great to be a Buddhist to the new board, and we shouldn't have any problems.
You are already looking to post less on the PT and concentrate more on spiritual matters, correct? This might be your big opportunity to shine!
Page 12 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News