The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

Stop the madness! And a possible new site rule?

Enough is enough!

There has been way too much silliness and name-calling on Nexus lately. People are joining groups they disagree with simply to argue with group members. Others are stalking and chasing members around the site simply to harass them. Thin-skinned or not, this has caused visits to Nexus to be a chore for many, and a few have left the site.

The only qualification to be a member of Nexus is to be a nontheist. Other than that we are a community. Civil debate is welcome in the forum, but should not be tolerated in individual groups (unless this is the purpose of the group), and on member pages.

If you are unsure what is acceptable behavior, check out the Site Rules. If you are having a problem or you notice anyone violating the rules, please use the "Report an Issue" link at the bottom of every page.

Finally, I am seriously considering adding the title of the below Phil Plait speech to our rules.

Click to open video in a separate window: Don't Be A Dick

What do you think? Good idea or not? I am interested in any feedback and open to solutions. I'm not looking for complaints.

Be forewarned that NO member names will be allowed in comments.

Tags: Phil, Phil Plait, Plait, Rules, Site, site rules

0 members like this

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mike Hein on August 29, 2010 at 9:24pm

Yup, Brother Richard, this pretty much covers why I only visit the site once a week now.

This in now way lessens what you have accomplished here. A lot of good is accomplished by having a membership roll of this size. Not a community any more, if it ever was, but A/N is still a powerful statement on the existence and numbers of non-theists.

Permalink Reply by Diana Agorio on September 17, 2010 at 7:28pm

I recently broke one of the rules of AN and have corrected my mistake. I misunderstood the status of blog posts on AN, assuming that it was the same as FB, where my page is just my page. I will not go into the details of how I broke the rule because in doing so, I would once again be breaking the rule. However, I learned some things that we should all keep in mind about our posts on AN.

I would like to highlight something said by Brother Richard: "Civil debate is welcome in the forum, but should not be tolerated in individual groups (unless this is the purpose of the group), and on member pages."

This rule is enforced by site design. A member cannot delete the comments of other members in the forum; but, can delete them on their own page. When you comment on a member's blog post, they have the right to delete it for any reason at all. This is true of every blog on the internet. If you have something that you really want to say to the AN community, you should do it on your own page or in the forum. And, don't assume that you know why a person deleted a comment. If it was your comment, you are dealing with your own emotional loss of your comment, and probably are not the best judge of the other person's motivation. If it was the comment of another member, the deleter may not want to communicate with that member for legitimate reasons, unlrelated to the actual comment. Remember: to assume makes an ass of u and me.

Another person's blog is not your space. Just because the blogger shares their opinion with you does not mean you can expect them to engage in lengthy debates. Their "failure' to debate you is not a reflection of their inability to articulate a response. If you are consistently commenting on member pages to engage in argument, that behavior is called trolling. It is likely reason why bloggers will delete your comments.

Permalink Reply by Фелч Гроган on September 18, 2010 at 1:54am

Stop making up fairy tales.

A person commented on your blog expressing skepticism of your assumptions. Rather than defending your position against the skepticism, you instead deleted the person's comments and accused him of both hatefulness and stalking. You have since added the charge of verbal abuse. All without a single drop of corroborating evidence.

You took comments that were addressing the content of your post, removed them altogether so no one else could draw their own conclusions, then reinterpreted those comments as being a personal attack on you and then respond by personally attacking the person that made the comments with accusations of intent that did not exist. Conveniently, all evidence that can either support or debunk all of your allegations has been purged.

And you think this is all perfectly normal, rational and acceptable behaviour?

Permalink Reply by Jo Jerome on September 18, 2010 at 5:58pm

A person commented on your blog expressing skepticism of your assumptions. Rather than defending your position against the skepticism, you instead deleted the person's comments and accused him of both hatefulness and stalking.

And yet, Matt VDB has commented many times on the same blog, expressing extreme skepticism of Diana's position. Those comments remain where Diana has defended her position against his skepticism.

Which would strongly suggest that Diana's criteria for deleting the other person's comments were NOT motivated solely (or possibly at all?) by academic challenge and a non-desire to defend her position. Otherwise, Matt's comments would be gone as well.

Permalink Reply by Richard Haynes on September 18, 2010 at 6:48pm

This discussion is closed for now. I have asked MoJoe to help out, and he will be posting a new thread in the morning where everyone can express their opinions.

In the meantime, everyone take a breather. Please.