Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Is Atheism the official stance of boards.ie on religion?

Options
12346»

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    twinQuins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,199 ✭✭✭twinQuins


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Can they use your skin colour against you? your race? your sex? whether you're LGBT or not?

    You don't choose any of those, you choose your religious beliefs.


  • Options
    #153
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    twinQuins wrote: »
    You don't choose any of those, you choose your religious beliefs.

    Personally in AH I don't see why faith based subjects shouldn't be treated in the same respect as any other subject including LGBT, ethnicity based subjects / gender based subjects, politics and so on. Moderation should be applied evenly based on criterion set in the charter and applied evenly irrespective of a moderators personal beliefs?

    Or what are you saying when you demarcate this in this way?


  • Options
    #154
    twinQuins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,199 ✭✭✭twinQuins


    Uh, political beliefs aren't protected, AFAIK and neither should they be. If you choose to believe certain things you've got to accept that those beliefs may be challenged and, in some cases, even ridiculed.

    That's just my opinion, I'm not saying that's the way things are.


  • Options
    #155
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    I'm not saying beliefs should be protected in any way. Take a good read of my posts and this is the last thing I am suggesting. I am saying that the only means of moderating should be by the normal criterion, flaming, trolling, being uncivil etc rather than treating certain subjects (ethnicity, LGBT issues and so on) above other issues (such as faith and belief, politics etc). This seems more than reasonable.


  • Options
    #156
    twinQuins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,199 ✭✭✭twinQuins


    Flaming, trolling and being uncivil are already covered by the rules, you don't need special rules for them.

    Ethnicity, LGBT, etc. are not being held above other issues, unless you're suggesting that they are held above beliefs. Which is right.

    You say you don't want beliefs protected but honestly I don't see what, exactly, you do want. If you don't want beliefs protected then there's nothing to address.

    EDIT: Checking AH's charter I see no mention of LGBT issues, just racism and immigrant bashing. This is more than likely due to how often the topics come up in AH.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    twinQuins wrote: »
    Flaming, trolling and being uncivil are already covered by the rules, you don't need special rules for them.

    I never said they should.
    twinQuins wrote: »
    Ethnicity, LGBT, etc. are not being held above other issues, unless you're suggesting that they are held above beliefs. Which is right.

    At present I think if you look to threads dealing with either they are being treated differently. I've posted a quote from a recent thread where a user has said that Christians are mentally handicapped amongst other similar ad-hominems that clearly goes beyond just as a result of debating beliefs. Indeed, I have seen similar posts go unnoticed in the past. It is up to the moderators if they want to enforce the rules on an equivalent basis though, I'm just claiming that there probably is a bias of some form.
    twinQuins wrote: »
    You say you don't want beliefs protected but honestly I don't see what, exactly, you do want. If you don't want beliefs protected then there's nothing to address.

    I say very clearly that I don't because simply that I don't. The last thing I think should happen on boards is that a thread or a forum is moderated based on the personal beliefs of a moderator which is why what biko originally said concerned me.


  • Options
    #158
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Just on LGBT, AH probably would be more lenient on some of the posts on those issues, same as it's more lenient on posts attacking Religion or indeed Atheism!

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #159
    twinQuins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,199 ✭✭✭twinQuins


    Jakkass wrote: »
    I've posted a quote from a recent thread where a user has said that Christians are mentally handicapped amongst other similar ad-hominems that clearly goes beyond just as a result of debating beliefs. Indeed, I have seen similar posts go unnoticed in the past. It is up to the moderators if they want to enforce the rules on an equivalent basis though, I'm just claiming that there probably is a bias of some form.

    Did you report those posts? Mods can't read every post in every thread.


  • Options
    #160
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    You think each of these is acceptable?

    "Why don't you start a commune where you share everything if you're such a communist?"

    "Why don't you give up your car and electricity and walk anywhere if you think global warming is such a problem?"

    "Why don't you wait until it's no longer that (meaning "your menstration period") period of the month if you're so emotional about it?"

    "Why don't you find some tranny in the George if you feel so alone in your sexuality?"

    "Isn't there something in your country's constitution about you having rights? WTF are you doing here then?"

    I hold the above to be questions that do nothing to further a debate, but inflame the questioned. It's baiting.


  • Options
    #161
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You think each of these is acceptable?

    "Why don't you start a commune where you share everything if you're such a communist?"

    "Why don't you give up your car and electricity and walk anywhere if you think global warming is such a problem?"

    "Why don't you wait until it's no longer that (meaning "your menstration period") period of the month if you're so emotional about it?"

    "Why don't you find some tranny in the George if you feel so alone in your sexuality?"

    "Isn't there something in your country's constitution about you having rights? WTF are you doing here then?"

    I hold the above to be questions that do nothing to further a debate, but inflame the questioned. It's baiting.

    Are those AH posts?

    So the problem is AH then?

    Probably half those posts are internet warriors. I'd suggest a thicker skin, not worth the energy.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    old_aussie
    Registered Users Posts: 3,410 ✭✭✭old_aussie


    biko wrote: »
    Actually, that was just rude and I apologise for that.

    Rude to who, another user or to yourself?


  • Options
    #163
    twinQuins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,199 ✭✭✭twinQuins


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You think each of these is acceptable?

    [...]

    I hold the above to be questions that do nothing to further a debate, but inflame the questioned. It's baiting.

    On a more serious forum, perhaps. AH can be quite... irreverent. I've seen posts like that on virtually topic and nothing was done because they're harmless, really.

    When the posts turn more nasty or when a particular user continues along those lines it becomes clear they're baiting and are censured accordingly.


Advertisement