Stop the madness! And a possible new site rule?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Sentient Biped on August 24, 2010 at 7:13pm

Richard thank you for addressing this issue. Stalking and chasing people around is not a form of building community. There are going to be many people who disagree on style and content. That's just life.

Live and let live should be somewhere in the rules, but don't be a dick is probably just as good. Unless that's sexist, then maybe it should be don't be a jerk (that was an attempt at humor).

Permalink Reply by Cheepnis on August 24, 2010 at 7:36pm

For a group that is constantly accused of having no morals, we should be particularly sensitive to how we behave towards others. We consider ourselves "more evolved" and "enlightened" and able to see through the bullshlt? Let's demonstrate that fact with our actions and words.

Permalink Reply by Matt M on August 24, 2010 at 7:48pm

Perhaps we could have groups where (clean, civil, and spirited) debate is welcome and encouraged and other groups where people share their own ideas, opinions, and experiences without countering or invaliding other posters?

I joined AtheistNexus because I was tired of being in the extreme minority and having everything attributed to religion. I don't want to take away from people who want to vent, but I think there's room here for everyone.

Permalink Reply by Brother Richard on August 24, 2010 at 8:21pm

This kind of debate forum is in the works. However, I have put it on hold until we get this mess under control.

Permalink Reply by Cheepnis on August 24, 2010 at 9:51pm

The Brights forum has a section called "The Asylum" where anything goes -- I mean anything. While the forum as a whole is uncensored, if trolls start trouble or abusive threads are posted, they get moved to The Asylum where they can fester for the entertainment (schadenfreude?) of more rational onlookers.

Permalink Reply by funk Q on August 24, 2010 at 8:39pm

I have observed this phenomenon and have shied away from discussions because they degenerate into name calling, labelling and insulting other members. I think it's good and should be encouraged to attack the ideas of members but not the personalities of members.

Maybe the member initiating a discussion should be encouraged to monitor and arbitrate attacking comments before a discussion disintegrates into a contest of who can be the nastiest. This kind of behaviour is more suited to the milieu of belief and faith not to the arena of freethinkers. Also, the site's own watch-persons (PC?) could assist the Original Poster (OP) to maintain order and courtesy in the background through the personal messaging system.

I don't want to have another rule added to those which are ignored at present and which I can't remember, but I also don't want Atheist Nexus to become a battleground for those who believe they are better atheists than others. It seems some people who profess to be atheistic in their thoughts are totalitarian in their nature. Bickerrhea (Groganism) should have no place in a forum dedicated to reason, science and fun. If this is all the life we get why are so many people happy to waste it in fights over ideas, beliefs, attitudes, values and other such nonsense when they should just enjoy what their senses provide during the brief time we have as living entities?

As I have observed previously, any discussion has covered all views by the third page, from then on it either lurches uncontrollably off topic or becomes a battlefield of personal attacks to establish who is the better “...ist”. Another approach is for all members to take the responsibility for monitoring the various forums, groups and blogs for negative attacks and post a standard phrase to remind members to be civil to each other as people.

Permalink Reply by John D on August 24, 2010 at 9:47pm

I will weigh in here.

I tend to disagree with Phil's speech. I think there is plenty of room for all types of atheists and all types of speech. I am normally gentle in my speech to my deluded coworkers. My goal in this setting is to make a harmonious working group and to stay productive. But... I will scream at the abortion protesters with their pictures of bloody fetuses. I will not be polite to these people. I am smart enough to know I cannot change their mind, but if I scare them enough they will stay out of public. To me, this is a win. Perhaps I can have a reasoned debate with someone willing to listen... and if this is the case I will use a different tactic. It is about the goal, as Phil states.

Phil claims that he can win minds with his soft approach. Well, I have been soft spoken for many years as the moral majority and the praying President framed my beliefs as invalid and evil by definition. I will not be polite any longer. Phil, and his fellows, have had decades to make progress and they have failed. They have failed because the enemies of good ideas have overpowered them with lunacy. He cannot prove his methods are effective in the public square. This is a war of ideas... yes Phil... this is a war.

He claims that taking the low road doesn't help. Well... I say prove it. When I belittle abortion protesters I put them on notice that they will have hell to pay for standing on my corner. They are staying away in my neighborhood. This is a win.

The goal is not to convert hard core believers. The goal is to provide cover for those who will choose to think. I will boldly provide that cover and what better way to do this than to insult the 50 foot tall statue of bloody zombie Jesus erected downtown. It will provide cover for those who will choose to think.

So, I say to Phil. Good for you for being a nice guy. The world needs nice guys. Nice guys even do things like sell books. But Phil, don't try to claim your methods have worked. And really... why did Martin Luther King actually succeed? It is because there was a Malcolm X standing behind him.

As far as rude behavior on this blog. I think it is overboard to call someone an idiot, moron, etc. I recommend this be handled on an individual basis. If someone has gone overboard they should be warned. A simple "Hey... don't insult people like that" should work.

The reason I am here is that I enjoy a good scrap. Sorry if that bothers people. I do not go to specific groups to attack their position. I stick to the open forum and find plenty to holler about. I do not stalk people. That is just lame.... but I may occasionally be a dick. Asking me to not be a dick may not work for me (it is kind of hard to know what constitutes being a dick... I mean... it is not very specific).

So - this is easy.

1) Please reduce personal attacks. Don't call people an idiot, moron, etc.
2) Please don't stalk people just cause they pissed you off. Get a life and move on.
3) Don't go to a site dedicated to a specific topic and purposely start a fight.

Sorry if I am being a Dick Richard. I love this site! I really want to make it work.

Permalink Reply by sacha on August 25, 2010 at 1:43am

I have to agree with John (again). I was there in the audience when Phil made his speech, and I think that works for Phil, but not everyone.

I'm not an apologist, and not all ideas are equal with others. When a member starts spouting off nonsense, I have no problem telling them that they need to post where the information came from and I have no problem with tearing the nonsense apart if it is bogus, has no proof, isn't something that has critical thinking behind it (That is exactly why I started the group No Nonsense).

I've seen many members get defensive and act as if I am attacking them, when I am only attacking their words and ideas. If you can't handle someone dissecting your beliefs, you may as well be a theist. I can't stand whining. If you do not like someone or that person hurt your feelings, stay away from them or ignore them. Time and Time again I've seen members whine about someone who has torn apart the idea, but has not said one word about the person, and they cry about how they were attacked. Some of us are kinder than others when it comes to stupidity, that does not mean one way is correct. As long as the person in question is not being attacked, and it is outside of the specific group for that idea, it's fair game. Grow up, not everyone is going to agree with you or coddle you. Get a thicker skin.

Stalking is inexcusable, don't go to the specific groups that have ideas you disagree with.

Funk Q:
Bickerrhea (Groganism) should have no place in a forum dedicated to reason, science and fun.

first of all, names are not to be mentioned here. Secondly, I don't see his way as bickering. I almost always agree with and publicly back him, and I have no problem what so ever with his way (I will, however gladly speak up if I disagree with him). He is straightforward and direct and does not stay silent when he sees ridiculous beliefs, and illogical thinking, and self-absorbed rude behaviour.

He will spend an exorbitant amount of time checking and rechecking his sources, and makes sure that there are no holes in his argument. His posts are clear, well researched, and interesting and it makes for a great discussion. I wish more members were like him.

He also does not tolerate inappropriate posting, I know a lot of members have been angry at him for speaking up about where to post what, and to ask people to look and see if the subject is already being discussed, so that there are not duplicate posts. He points out the rules here, and he makes sure that his posts are in the correct place, are not spam, are not duplicates, etc.

I think everyone should use his posting guidelines flowchart. It is really all about common courtesy, but so many people lack even a minimum amount of that. This would be a spectacular site if everyone was as meticulous as he. There aren't a lot of moderators here. There needs to be more of a member voice when etiquette is not upheld. Speak up and do not tolerate it. I speak up when I see no regard for others or for the rules, and there are a few of us who do. I also speak up and back members who have been targeted without warrant.
Perhaps if there were more who did not keep silent because they are afraid of hurting someone's feelings, things would be better, and everyone would stop whining about you-know-who.

This is a discussion EVERYONE should read.

Permalink Reply by sacha on August 25, 2010 at 2:03am

Do I have to clarify that I like Funk Q and I am not attacking him, but only disagreeing with something he has posted?

That is what some members want, and I have no time to coddle children.

If Funk Q needed me to clarify something, I would, but I think he knows that I am not attacking him, that there is a big difference between that and disagreeing with something that has been said. Plus I am confident that Funk Q would tell me to fuck off if I were to attack him personally, and not cry about it, and tell everyone that I am a big meanie and that I hurt his feelings, or go to every discussion I post to tell everyone how terrible and hateful I am. boo fucking hoo

Permalink Reply by Little Name Atheist on August 26, 2010 at 1:51am

I didn't delete my comment, someone else did. Dismaying, as it was a neutral comment meant to clarify. I knew this because I remember the discussion where neologisms were being created, and felch created (or repeated) the term bickerrhea in a list of similar terms.

No, you didn't need to clarify that you like funk Q, not to me.

Permalink Reply by Little Name Atheist on August 26, 2010 at 2:32am

Fred, this is not that big of an issue, and there's no need to read between the lines.

Moderators shouldn't get special treatment. If they fan the flames or write stupid things, their/my comments should be treated the same as other site members.

Permalink Reply by Brother Richard on August 26, 2010 at 6:45am

For the record, I deleted the comment and the one made by someone else. Both mentioned a member's name. As I stated in my intro, that was a no no. I understand both were meant to clarify, but they still named specific names.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 10
• Next ›
• Page