A&A Feedback

Turtwig

Mod:

This thread is about A & A feedback. That includes the moderation of posts by robin, Dades, Asia and me. NOT the moderation, or actions of mods, or other posters, on other fora! Criticism and praise of A & A will stand or fall by its own merit.

Thank you.

Gordon

Apologies.

J C

wrote:

Originally Posted by J C
I thought that the feedback thread was the one thread where posters can question mod decisions/instructions??

robindch
This is the A+A feedback thread where people can discuss just about everything and anything concerning A+A, except for moderator intervention which should be discussed in the feedback forum which is specifically for that purpose.

I trust this distinction is clear, now that it's been explained

Your distinction was clear ... until I read this:):-

Turtwig wrote: »

Mod:

This thread is about A & A feedback. That includes the moderation of posts by robin, Dades, Asia and me. NOT the moderation, or actions of mods, or other posters, on other fora! Criticism and praise of A & A will stand or fall by its own merit.

Thank you.

Turtwig

Um well my understanding of it was that you can indeed discuss forum moderation. Just not moderation of this thread itself. That has to go to pm, site wide feedback or helpdesk.

Turtwig

jank wrote: »

This. The charter is there for show, but is not strictly applied on both sides of the debate. Either it should be applied or changed. Quite simple really.

It's not there for show but just like you don't want a speeding ticket for 2km/hr over the limit, the charter isn't applied to the letter. It varies based upon thread context e.g abortion thread is handled differently to a thread about the FSM.

Cabaal

GreeBo wrote: »

It's clearly ridiculing those with religious beliefs.
Apologies for not seeing your earlier requests, not omnipresent.

In your personal view, you're entitled to that... Just like I can call the catholic religion nonsense.

There are many devout believers in the FSM ... People who have taken sworn ouths to affirm as much,

who are you to belittle them when you won't give the same rights to others to call other religions nonsense,

The FSM is as real and true to its believers as any other religion is to its believers.

robindch

J C wrote: »

Your distinction was clear ... until I read this:

Just to clarify the clarification of the clarification - this thread is about feedback on the A+A forum, how it's run, what it's good at, what it's bad at, what it needs more of, what it needs less of and so on. That discussion can obviously include any reasonable, generally charter-compliant comment about general moderation policy.

If, on the other hand, some poster is unhappy about about some specific instance of forum moderation, either in this thread or anywhere else in the forum, then the feedback forum's the place to raise the issue and have it reviewed by senior site admins - as it always has been.

I trust this clarification is clear

GreeBo

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Is it? Why do you say that? (this can go on until either of us get bored, or you provide something more substantial than slightly differently worded assertions.)

You are now making stuff up ('anything else') which isn't in the charter and which Turtwig has already explained to you.

This isn't going to achieve anything except wasting everyone's time, but maybe that's the goal.

Sorry but "anything else" is your quote.
The charter purports equality between all posters and all beliefs, the reality of how the forum runs is that leeway is given to those of an A&A affliction.
There is no problem with that, the problem is pretending its something it is not.

IT-Guy wrote: »

And I'm sure those rules work for your forum. However in A+A I think the rules reflect reality, no idea or beliefs are above satire and parody. I don't like golf, however I wouldn't disrespect someone who does but would have no problem parodying, satirising or ridiculing the sport because it is just that, a sport. Similarly with religion, I respect the right of people to their beliefs no matter how silly I think they are. It does not follow though that I must never parody, satirise or outright ridicule some of the crazy, crazy s**t that religious people believe. Censoring my POV because others don't like it though I haven't caused offence is an act borne of a fearful, oppressive worldview.

Personally I think a lot of people dislike ridicule of their religion because they know there's more than a grain of truth to it but want so badly for their worldview to be validated they can't take any criticism of it. Google the Johari window, it's analogous to any closely held belief.

No one is censoring your opinion, merely pointing out that the way A&A followers post is not in line with the charter. Im not saying you are wrong, I am saying the charter is wrong or not followed.

Gordon wrote: »

Some could argue the below to be ridiculing other posters.

Originally Posted by GreeBo View Post
So now we have "real" feeder courses...but not "real" members?
Hilarious.

I cant seem to get any points past the chip on your shoulder so I'm not going to bother.
As you seem to know, everything is perfectly hunky dory in the massively wealthy clubs. Champagne, caviar and port wine are flowing and the members point and laugh at all other clubs.

Oh dear Gordon, if you had read that thread you would in fact see that I am poking fun at myself, being from a wealthy club. 10 Hail Marys penance.

Gordon wrote: »

Quote:
We also don't allow golf forum members to ridicule other sports either.
Some could argue that this is looking down at footballers and potentially ridiculing them
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreeBo View Post
let's try to remain civil with each other here lads, don't want to start handing out infractions but will if the tone of some of these posts continues ...we are golfers , not footballers.




Some could argue that this is looking down at footballers and potentially ridiculing them

Thank you for so clearly demonstrating my point.
On the golf forum do we pretend to hold all other sports in the same regard as we hold golf.
We are golfers, golf is our thing, not football, tennis or religion.
The forum exists solely to discuss golf from a golfers point of view.


The A&A forum exists for what reason exactly?

This may be at its heart a forum for those who share atheist or agnostic views, but those of all faiths or beliefs are welcome in any discussion. Also welcome are any questions/comments relating to religion, morality, ethics or the origins of life in general. (Just don't hold out for a definitive answer).

Only a couple of obvious rules need be iterated for the sake of clarity:

1. No personal insults. Attack the post not the poster. If you can't keep your head, take it elsewhere.

2. Respect the right of people to hold religious or irreligious beliefs which are different from yours. Forum moderators reserve the right to take action against posts or posters which they deem to be offensive or intended to inflame.

3. While posting of controversial questions to stimulate debate is acceptable, soap boxing, i.e constant repetition of a single viewpoint while refusing to entertain discussion on it, is both disruptive and annoying, and will not be tolerated. You are expected to contribute something other than placard proclamations.

The charter would have you believe that its to allow open discussion for all side, religious and irreligious.
Thats clearly not the reality of how the forum is run.

Constant repetition of "religion is nonsense" seems to be allowed without issue, however J C gets banned for constantly posting the opposing viewpoint?
Seems to fly in the face of Charter item #2.

FSM was created purely for satire, allowing it be trotted out every 5 posts when others are trying to make a point that they see valid is kinda pathetic really.
The depths that this feedback thread has been allowed to sink to, again, purely by A&A afflicted posters without moderation is sad.
You sit around patting each other on the back laughing at "them" as your forum becomes a mockery of itself, a satire of a real forum, tentacles and all.

Delirium

GreeBo wrote: »

Sorry but "anything else" is your quote.
The charter purports equality between all posters and all beliefs, the reality of how the forum runs is that leeway is given to those of an A&A affliction.
There is no problem with that, the problem is pretending its something it is not.

You complain of others using inflamatory/offensive language, and then you post that?

Turtwig

GreeBo wrote: »

Constant repetition of "religion is nonsense" seems to be allowed without issue, however J C gets banned for constantly posting the opposing viewpoint?

Holy sweet Jesus no! JC wasn't banned but if you think his viewpoint is the reason he draws mod action then I suggest you read his posts or debate with him.

Also Mormonism and scientology have spurious origins. As do many other ideas, just because the origin story appears flimsy doesn't mean others don't take it very seriously. FSM may have started as a parody but it's grown into something with a serious group of followers too.

GreeBo

SW wrote: »

You complain of others using inflamatory/offensive language, and then you post that?

Thanks for proving my point.

Delirium

GreeBo wrote: »

Thanks for proving my point.

How so? I haven't suggested you be sanctioned for it. Merely pointing out the hypocrisy of what you posted.

GreeBo

SW wrote: »

How so? I haven't suggested you be sanctioned for it. Merely pointing out the hypocrisy of what you posted.

The hypocrisy is that you have a problem with me calling atheism an affliction but no issue with religion being deemed nonsense.

keane2097

GreeBo wrote: »

The hypocrisy is that you have a problem with me calling atheism an affliction but no issue with religion being deemed nonsense.

He didn't prove your point, he just pointed out how you are being hypocritical.

I'm sure some of us will be slightly discommoded by you calling atheism an affliction, but I don't anyone will be wanting you banned for it.

Dades

GreeBo wrote: »

The charter purports equality between all posters and all beliefs, the reality of how the forum runs is that leeway is given to those of an A&A affliction.

For the last time the charter DOES NOT purport equality between posters and all beliefs - so please stop trotting out this inaccuracy. It's starting to get annoying.

The charter states:

Respect the right of people to hold religious or irreligious beliefs which are different from yours.

It does NOT require that any belief be respected - only acknowledges that people have the right to hold a belief. It's a common distinction often stated in non-believer communities. Respect the believer, not the beliefs. If the believer gets offended that their beliefs (or those of others) are not respected in the A&A forum, well then that is their problem. The clue is in the name. No idea, concept or dogma should be guaranteed respect or be above criticism. The charter does NOT protect beliefs, or those holding them from being offended.

GreeBo wrote: »

Constant repetition of "religion is nonsense" seems to be allowed without issue, however J C gets banned for constantly posting the opposing viewpoint?
Seems to fly in the face of Charter item #2.

J C is not banned, but due to his 9 year history of derailing threads and the fact that everything he posts has been posted a dozen times before (aka soapboxing) he is restricted to a single thread. There is a huge history here you are unaware of. I can't see a lot of mods being as lenient to such a poster - yourself included.

Delirium

GreeBo wrote: »

The hypocrisy is that you have a problem with me calling atheism an affliction but no issue with religion being deemed nonsense.

I haven't reported the post or called for any action on it, how exactly do I have a problem with it? I was merely pointing out that you have no problem engaging in posting language that is similar to that you're complaining about.

PopePalpatine

GreeBo wrote: »

The hypocrisy is that you have a problem with me calling atheism an affliction but no issue with religion being deemed nonsense.

"Affliction" has quite a different connotation from "nonsense", and you almost certainly knew that.

GreeBo

Dades wrote: »

For the last time the charter DOES NOT purport equality between posters and all beliefs - so please stop trotting out this inaccuracy. It's starting to get annoying.

The charter states:
It does NOT require that any belief be respected - only acknowledges that people have the right to hold a belief. It's a common distinction often stated in non-believer communities. Respect the believer, not the beliefs. If the believer gets offended that their beliefs (or those of others) are not respected in the A&A forum, well then that is their problem. The clue is in the name. No idea, concept or dogma should be guaranteed respect or be above criticism. The charter does NOT protect beliefs, or those holding them from being offended.

J C is not banned, but due to his 9 year history of derailing threads and the fact that everything he posts has been posted a dozen times before (aka soapboxing) he is restricted to a single thread. There is a huge history here you are unaware of. I can't see a lot of mods being as lenient to such a poster - yourself included.

So he is banned from all but one thread then. Thanks for confirming.

The charter states that you should not post in an inflammatory or offensive manner.

PopePalpatine wrote: »

"Affliction" has quite a different connotation from "nonsense", and you almost certainly knew that.

No, they are both derogatory terms.
Are you trying to tell me that "nonsense" doesnt have a negative connotation?

SW wrote: »

I haven't reported the post or called for any action on it, how exactly do I have a problem with it? I was merely pointing out that you have no problem engaging in posting language that is similar to that you're complaining about.

How do you have a problem with it?

SW wrote: »

You complain of others using inflamatory/offensive language, and then you post that?

So you dont think my post was inflammatory or offensive now?

PopePalpatine

GreeBo wrote: »

No, they are both derogatory terms.
Are you trying to tell me that "nonsense" doesnt have a negative connotation?

You very well know that "affliction" is a synonym for "disease".

Bannasidhe

GreeBo wrote: »

So he is banned from all but one thread then. Thanks for confirming.

The charter states that you should not post in an inflammatory or offensive manner.


No, they are both derogatory terms.
Are you trying to tell me that "nonsense" doesnt have a negative connotation?



How do you have a problem with it?

So you dont think my post was inflammatory or offensive now?

why don't you cut to the chase and simply tell us what it is you want?

Delirium

GreeBo wrote: »

How do you have a problem with it?

So you dont think my post was inflammatory or offensive now?

That doesn't show I have a problem with the post, if I did I'd report it.

I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of you posting using that language while complaining about others doing likewise.

GreeBo

PopePalpatine wrote: »

You very well know that "affliction" is a synonym for "disease".

And nonsense is a synonym for:
Absurdity
Stupidity
Baloney
Foolishness
Gibberish
Madness
Ranting
Tripe

do I need to go on?

PopePalpatine

"Nonsense" sounds a lot less serious than "affliction". "Atheism is an affliction" sounds like something straight out of the pages of Alive!/Der Sturmer.

Bannasidhe

PopePalpatine wrote: »

"Nonsense" sounds a lot less serious than "affliction". "Atheism is an affliction" sounds like something straight out of the pages of Alive!/Der Sturmer.

Well, it can be an 'affliction' in a country which has religion woven into it's fabric making nonsense of any claims that all citizens are equal.

keane2097

PopePalpatine wrote: »

"Nonsense" sounds a lot less serious than "affliction". "Atheism is an affliction" sounds like something straight out of the pages of Alive!/Der Sturmer.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Well, it can be an 'affliction' in a country which has religion woven into it's fabric making nonsense of any claims that all citizens are equal.

Well regardless of any of that the point is on this forum someone like GreeBo will be asked to justify his description of it as an affliction rather than everyone hiding behind "I'm offended" and giving up on the discussion.

The accusations of childishness could easily be flying in the other direction.

Turtwig

Stating the customs of Judaism are nonsense is fine. There's a world of difference between stating that and the people that subscribe to it have an affliction.

Homosexual desires are nonsensical, they might be afflicted?

Strange thing about this forum with the exception of race, statements similar to the above are permitted in some circumstances. Remarks that atheists are immoral, repugnant sub humans generally lead to discussions on biscuits.

5uspect

Inflammatory and Offensive:
All Catholics spend their weekends buggering goats. They are afflicted with disgusting desires.

Criticism of belief:
Religion spreads like a virus. Those afflicted with the fundamental varient, such as Mormons, feel the need to spread the virus.

The former in indefensible. The charter prevents this. The latter is an interesting topic for discussion. The language is perhaps strong but it attacks the concept and not a whole group of society.

Similarly saying that all Atheists are baby eaters is not good while saying that Atheists can be heavily critical to the point of antitheism is perfectly fine.

In all the years I posted here this is how the place has been run, and it works pretty fairly. You really have to be an utter hateful tool to get banned.

robindch

GreeBo wrote: »

So he is banned from all but one thread then.

So he is not banned then.

GreeBo wrote: »

So you dont think my post was inflammatory or offensive now?

At this point, I'd imagine that most people find your posts significantly more tedious than dangerously inflammatory.

Other than the prohibition against soapboxing, there isn't a rule against being tedious, but I'm sure we could discuss introducing one if you feel it would up the standard of debate and exchange.

GreeBo

5uspect wrote: »

Inflammatory and Offensive:
All Catholics spend their weekends buggering goats. They are afflicted with disgusting desires.

Criticism of belief:
Religion spreads like a virus. Those afflicted with the fundamental varient, such as Mormons, feel the need to spread the virus.

The former in indefensible. The charter prevents this. The latter is an interesting topic for discussion. The language is perhaps strong but it attacks the concept and not a whole group of society.

I honestly dont see how you think comparing religion to a virus couldn't be inflammatory. You are accusing people with religious beliefs of spreading a disease.

Would you be ok with me saying "The Irish spread through the world like a disease" or perhaps I should pick Jews, I think some German guy tried that before and it ended badly though. Weirdly the Jewish community took offense.

It may be an interesting topic for an Atheist, but to someone religious its not "interesting".
Again, I'm fine with it being allowed, but dont pretend that the forum is aimed at everyone with an equal footing.

GreeBo

robindch wrote: »

At this point, I'd imagine that most people find your posts significantly more tedious than dangerously inflammatory.

At a far, far earlier point I found the posts about FSM asinine and tedious, but since they are A&A backed, game on I guess.
Its certainly a hell of a way to run a constructive feedback thread.