Some Proposals

[Mister D]

Mind you, I don't want tPF to be some kind of debate society. That's not going to work. It should be a fun place where you can really talk about anything and people of all different backgrounds can contribute. All I'm asking for is a little more effort. Your opinion isn't valid merely because you have it.

[Ethereal]

Mind you, I don't want tPF to be some kind of debate society. That's not going to work. It should be a fun place where you can really talk about anything and people of all different backgrounds can contribute. All I'm asking for is a little more effort. Your opinion isn't valid merely because you have it.

I am under no illusion that tPF can or should be made into a debate society. However, there has to be some minimal and objective standards that promote respectful, topical, and mature discussion of politics, otherwise, what is even the point of this place?

[Chris]

Mind you, I don't want tPF to be some kind of debate society. That's not going to work. It should be a fun place where you can really talk about anything and people of all different backgrounds can contribute. All I'm asking for is a little more effort. Your opinion isn't valid merely because you have it.

Agree. A forum has to allow for all kinds of people with different opinions and ideas. But proposal one is vital, discuss even attack opinions and ideas on a topic just not other members. And communicate and enforce that consistently.

[Mister D]

I am under no illusion that tPF can or should be made into a debate society. However, there has to be some minimal and objective standards that promote respectful, topical, and mature discussion of politics, otherwise, what is even the point of this place?

Agreed.

[Mister D]

Agree. A forum has to allow for all kinds of people with different opinions and ideas. But proposal one is vital, discuss even attack opinions and ideas on a topic just not other members. And communicate and enforce that consistently.

I don't think you can reasonably object to proposal one. Just adhering to that will reduce the animosity here.

[Ethereal]

I don't think you can reasonably object to proposal one. Just adhering to that will reduce the animosity here.

To me, it's the perfect solution. It still allows for edgy debates but keeps things from getting too personal. It's the best of both worlds.

[Standing Wolf]

Or at the very least put a little effort into explaining why exactly you feel this or that way about the OP. Claiming it's "nonsense" and then following that up with a succession of random quotes doesn't cut it.

The problem - and it isn't a minor one - that came to mind immediately when I read the first half dozen posts in this thread is that there are people here who consistently fail to recognize their own bad behavior, while condemning the exact same habits and tendencies in others. With these folks, it always seems to boil down to: if they do it, it's not "making it personal" or "attacking the poster" - yet they characterize pretty much anything I write that rubs them the wrong way as falling into one of those categories. Why would I believe, at this point, that those individuals would accept the judgment of the Mods in such matters, in enforcing more stringent rules, when they have consistently demonstrated a ridiculous lack of objectivity in the past?

[Common]

From the OP:



http://thepoliticalforums.com/thread...=1#post2220641
http://thepoliticalforums.com/thread...=1#post2220643

The flaw when you post other statements in threads, is that you never post preceding threads that may have started the discourse.

[Ethereal]

The problem - and it isn't a minor one - that came to mind immediately when I read the first half dozen posts in this thread is that there are people here who consistently fail to recognize their own bad behavior, while condemning the exact same habits and tendencies in others. With these folks, it always seems to boil down to: if they do it, it's not "making it personal" or "attacking the poster" - yet they characterize pretty much anything I write that rubs them the wrong way as falling into one of those categories. Why would I believe, at this point, that those individuals would accept the judgment of the Mods in such matters, in enforcing more stringent rules, when they have consistently demonstrated a ridiculous lack of objectivity in the past?

It doesn't matter if they "accept" it or not. Once the standards are in place, they will be obliged to adhere to them regardless. If they refuse to do so, then they will be subject to infractions and a possible banning.

[Ethereal]

The flaw when you post other statements in threads, is that you never post preceding threads that may have started the discourse.

Exactly. The implication here is that some posters consider themselves blameless, which is why they want to keep playing the insoluble blame game. But that will never be resolved, so it is futile and pointless to pursue it.