Rule Suggestion

First things first: I am posting this here because LJS said so. If you don´t like this topic being here, pls move (if you are a mod) and blame him.


Now to buiseness:

I have noticed that talks about religion/culture/politics/etc. stay polite, friendly and constructive until exactly the point where someone starts procastinating or claims [thought_1] is superior to [thought_2]. Really, it never happens before someone does that and it always happens immediately after someone does that.

I hereby request a rule to revent flame wars against
a) religious, political or cultural procastination
as well as
b) any statements about the superiority of one religion, culture or political view above one or all others,
except if
c) used in a roleplay for realism/depth to the universe (e.g. the Equestrian VS Strigiforme clash in the empire RPs)

edit d) Discussion of the benefits of [system_a] over [system_b] or similar without generalizing the whole system being better does NOT count as against this rule, as only the benefits of one system over another are explained while leaving open the possibility of the other system having benefits in other areas, leaving the question of which system is better in overall open and to personal ideals/setting of priorities thus not being a provocation of a flame war as any flame war following such a post does not originate from the post itself, but rather an inappropriate reaction to said post.

e) This rule also does not apply if the context/the way it is used indicates the statement is meant as a (badly phrased) personal opinion on a non-controversial topic (e.g. 'Zero is best reploid' but not 'I believe Hitler was misunderstood')

Suggested punishment would be 1-2 point(s) for provocating a flame war.

See that is quite a gray area and although agreeable hard to uphold and will happen quite often, not only in contexts of arguments. Usually I would prefer to lower the punishment in these cases, but I guess 1 point = warning and so the moderator can merely warn a person about that ... and yet to be sure I suggest allowing for a warning with no points just in case there is already a point on that person.

Iv121 wrote:

See that is quite a gray area and although agreeable hard to uphold and will happen quite often, not only in contexts of arguments. Usually I would prefer to lower the punishment in these cases, but I guess 1 point = warning and so the moderator can merely warn a person about that ... and yet to be sure I suggest allowing for a warning with no points just in case there is already a point on that person.

I see what you mean.
I guess explaining the benefits of e.g. social market VS free market WITHOUT generalizing that one is unarguably the better one should be allowed. Gonna edit OP.

Ivan2006 wrote:

b) any statements about the superiority of one religion, culture or political view above one or all others,

Religion yes, culture and political view... Yes, depending on how serious, I mean for example, if I went and said : Zero is best reploid, then I would be in trouble. But if repeated In the flesh part II from the wall (if I had my way, I'd have all of you shot) with intent and seriousness, then some action should be taken.

Prototype wrote:

Ivan2006 wrote:

b) any statements about the superiority of one religion, culture or political view above one or all others,

Religion yes, culture and political view... Yes, depending on how serious, I mean for example, if I went and said : Zero is best reploid, then I would be in trouble. But if repeated In the flesh part II from the wall (if I had my way, I'd have all of you shot) with intent and seriousness, then some action should be taken.

Fixed.

Ok, I agree that everyone needs to be a lot less sensitive, but it's insane to "not make any statements about the superiority of one religion, culture or political view above one or all others." Some systems of governments are worse than others, and only one religion can ever really be true, not counting weird heresies and things. Can't we just be adults and discuss things without screaming about it?

This is a good idea in theory, but I think it would be really hard to enforce consistently in a way that made everyone happy. Perhaps a better idea would be to forbid threads that are specifically about religion or politics? Neither one of those should be relevant to Futurecraft, so I can't imagine it would affect any productive discussion, and those are where most of the flame wars come from. That would be much easier to enforce.

Laibach wrote:

Ok, I agree that everyone needs to be a lot less sensitive, but it's insane to "not make any statements about the superiority of one religion, culture or political view above one or all others." Some systems of governments are worse than others, and only one religion can ever really be true, not counting weird heresies and things. Can't we just be adults and discuss things without screaming about it?

One could simply argue that noone can prove ones believe to be the true one, making your argument invalid.

@LJS: Maybe that would be easier to enforce, but that´s a point where we gotta set priorities: Do we want easy enforcement or the full range of topics?
I can´t make rules and neither can you...

Ivan2006 wrote:

Laibach wrote:

Ok, I agree that everyone needs to be a lot less sensitive, but it's insane to "not make any statements about the superiority of one religion, culture or political view above one or all others." Some systems of governments are worse than others, and only one religion can ever really be true, not counting weird heresies and things. Can't we just be adults and discuss things without screaming about it?

One could simply argue that noone can prove ones believe to be the true one, making your argument invalid.

They could argue that, but your rule wouldn't allow it. Free speech mang.

Laibach wrote:

Ivan2006 wrote:

Laibach wrote:

Ok, I agree that everyone needs to be a lot less sensitive, but it's insane to "not make any statements about the superiority of one religion, culture or political view above one or all others." Some systems of governments are worse than others, and only one religion can ever really be true, not counting weird heresies and things. Can't we just be adults and discuss things without screaming about it?

One could simply argue that noone can prove ones believe to be the true one, making your argument invalid.

They could argue that, but your rule wouldn't allow it. Free speech mang.

I think that would be okay, because it is a neutralization of the argument that was used to justify breaking the rule in the first place.

A board is a place to discuss things, when said debate spirals out of control actions, of course, need to be taken, but attempting to put some kind of injunction in place to infringe on everyone's ability to talk with other people about a certain topic just sounds like a terrible, terrible idea to me. You say 'flame war', but as someone already pointed out that's entirely subjective. What may seem like a civil debate to one person may look like a full-blown shitfest to another.

I'd rather not have this forum become Austria incarnate. No support.

Also, I think we've established the points system is obsolete. When fr0st gets the forum up that's going to be changed.

I agree with Tiel; I disagree with trying to prevent flame wars, and think its better justto lock the thread when it gets to the level of "RARGHHHHHHH IM GOING TO KILL YOU RARRGHHH [INSERT REASONSHERE] RARGHHH!!!!" I would prefer just to be mildly offended occasionally than have restrictions imposed on what could have been interesting discussions.

https://futurecraft.forumotion.com/t1711p90-the-dedicated-argument-thread

I created this so people could keep it contained, instead of fights and flame wars spilling out into other areas.
(Think of it like a flame prison.)

Fleet Admiral Error wrote:

https://futurecraft.forumotion.com/t1711p90-the-dedicated-argument-thread

I created this so people could keep it contained, instead of fights and flame wars spilling out into other areas.
(Think of it like a flame prison.)

Well, for now it is a (non-argument) religion thread.

See what you have done?! You made people talk about god without shooting each other!

Desdenova wrote:

Fleet Admiral Error wrote:

https://futurecraft.forumotion.com/t1711p90-the-dedicated-argument-thread

I created this so people could keep it contained, instead of fights and flame wars spilling out into other areas.
(Think of it like a flame prison.)

Well, for now it is a (non-argument) religion thread.

See what you have done?! You made people talk about god without shooting each other!

They argue there so they don't argue elsewhere. Do you want a mod-kosher argument thread or summink?

That is more of a discussion over there, wait until sara is back with the folder of FC ideas he promised .

I'll delete flamewars. PM me or LJS or other mods if you want to report a post. Until then, discuss politics and religion all ya want.

If people are using actual arguments and having a moderately heated debate about a subject that is somewhat related to the topic does this rule still apply?