| Author |
Religious/political threads on Esato - to be or not to be? |
Sammy_boy
Joined: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
PM, WWW
|
After a recent thread descended into a faintly amusing but very vitriolic flame war and was locked (found HERE for reference) it has made me rethink my opinions of having the above topics on esato.
They seem to be driving wedges between trusted and respected members who previously got on well. People come to this forum to discuss a common interest - mobile phones, and specifically (though not exclusively)  ones.
It seems that these religous/political threads are causing more grief than good, and some people don't seem to be able to have a rational debate on these subjects without arguments ensuing.
Some people also seem unable to take others' views into account or to agree or disagree. Btw, I am NOT taking sides with any of the parties involved in these past threads, I'm just getting a little fed up of seeing the same old arguments/points/flame wars cropping up frequently, and leaving members falling out with others.
And how does all this look to newer Esatonians? I bet it's put a few off from posting in certain sections of the site, if not totally.
@mods - hope you don't mind me posting this thread, hopefully people can talk about/debate this particular issue without resorting to petty insults or personal attacks.
"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke
|
|
|
scotsboyuk
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM, WWW
|
@Sammy_boy
Well said! I posted a similar thread a while ago, which you can read here.
Past efforts to get rid of them or limit them seem to have failed so one has had to make do and work within them to the extent of offering a balancing counter argument. However, it would be much more preferable if such threads were limited somehow so that we do not have the same sort of arguments we have recently seen (and so that people don't have to endure my gasbag replies  ).
_________________
"I may be drunk my dear woman, but in the morning I will be sober, and you will still be ugly." WSC
[ This Message was edited by: scotsboyuk on 2006-03-17 18:45 ] |
slattery69
Joined: Jan 03, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: north east england
PM |
i ve no objection to these sorts of threads continuing. however if people who are posting start expressing there view point as concrete facts then they have to accept they could be chanllenegd and proven incorrect. perhaps individual posters need to think before they type alittle more.
for example if you said imo america are evil and wrong that to me is foine as its a view point, however to often in these threads i read things like america are evil and worng and we all know it . this to me is someone trying to state a fact, which is 2 diffferent things
if you state a fact you need to back up your fact and if your back up info is incorect then you can in my opinion be shot down and rightly so. a view point i dont believe people should be a ttacked for as this is different
what worrys me about people people claiming view points as facts is we have a range of age groups and cultures on esato (a very good mix in my opinion) and they can be quite easily mislead by these supposed factual statemnets that arent anything but someone expressing a view point.
so to cut a long post short in summary yes for these threads to stay but for the individuals who post in them myself included) a bit more thought before posting as to wether its a view point or a statement of fact |
Sammy_boy
Joined: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
PM, WWW
|
That's the thing, I'm not against these types of thread per se, but the MANNER in which they seem to get conducted, where people don't seem to take others' opinions into account, flame others for disagreeing with them and generally being intolerant to others' points of view.
I'd like to see more intelligent debate, where people can express opinions without getting their head blown off by someone disagreeing, and a bit more empathy and thought going into posting.
"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke
|
slattery69
Joined: Jan 03, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: north east england
PM |
i think the problem is when people express an opinion most rational people can accept it, its when people start making staement of facts about there opinion they get called on it and then they get arsey.
the thread you used as an example is a very good example. one party tried to claim there opinion as fact when they were called on the factual side and they could prove it was anything more than a view point it then got into a small flame war.
like ive said post opinions as such and post facts with research backup or run the risk of been called to task.
if we all did that then these discussions could exist |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
I agree slattery, more thought should be made by people making blanket claims. Those people need to accept that others will demand coherent arguments, and won't accept a blanket controversial statement from a poster who makes no effort to back up their claims. I myself will persist in an argument until they make some effort to explain their point of view. That in my eyes is what happens when you make statements about things with no backup. You have to expect it. That's also why religious threads often get my blood roiled since many people say something and then say "because my god says so". That's no freakin' argument, that's just bloody-mindedness. So they spoke directly to God? No they just read a book written by humans who spoke to someone who reckoned they spoke to God. So I expect them to give up a little more justification for their statements than "God says so"
I certainly don't mind if someone pulls me up on points of fact or logic, and while I will fight tooth and nail when I feel I am right, I always listen to the other persons argument because while I try to be very careful in my statements, sometimes I'm just plain wrong (hard for me to admit, but there you have it). If peeps could more easily admit error, then many flame wars wouldn't get out of control to start with.
Personally I don't have a problem with flame wars. If a thread descends into a flame war that's just life. Yes it spoils it for the rest of those posting, but it's up to them to tell flamers to pull their heads in.
But ultimately if you don't like the way a thread is going you can leave, simple as that.
|
chamak
Joined: Jan 05, 2006
Posts: 226
From: Bangladesh
PM |
as a new member in esato i think,
we should talk with each other 'bout everything and anything that goes on life.
BUT
if it makes trouble between the memebers and make them irrational then i guess it's better not to have these kinda topics here, as we've to go to somewhere where there'll b some peace that's made by us, not by politicians  i hate ALL of 'em. the world would b far better w/o them. 
|
Jim
Joined: Jan 20, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: Belgium
PM |
Actually I'm not against it, it's more the fact that sometimes they popup for no reason at all. Sometimes they look as propaganda than a real discussion, the thread of reference is a good example and should be banned as it has no purpose at all than to grow the hate against the US.
Another example: threads with anti US is allowed here and I respect that and the point of view from the poster but what happens if I post an "anti islam" (for example, don't take it seriously) thread ? ...
Only solutions: warnings like on the IPB forums.
|
Sammy_boy
Joined: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
PM, WWW
|
It at the moment is a very sensitive subject this, so I'm hoping this doesn't descend into a flame war.
These subjects like religion and politics seem to have a lot of high running emotions and opinions in them, and they are dividing members who have previously gotten on - I'm talking in general here and not about recent threads.
"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke
|
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
I see what you are saying, but I must also mention, I have been in a flame war or two myself, but I actually still like and respect those I've had flames with. For example good old mib1800, who seems to have left for greener Nokia pastures, was very dogmatic, but he stuck with you through a flame and eventually you could get him to see reason, and even if he didn't agree he would grudgingly admit you "might" be right. He also was prepared to give reasons for his position, so I actually have lot of respect for mib1800, despite his often anti-SE stance. (I might even get flamed for saying that  ) No matter how much we argued, mib never insulted me personally. It came close (on both sides) but ultimately neither of us was so adamant about our position that we thought it worth putting anyone down over.
When a thread descends into unreserved name calling, I think Mods need to step in and take action. Anything else is just healthy argument
|
axxxr
Joined: Mar 21, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Londinium
PM, WWW
|
Sammy_boy you do have have a good point but we have all been here before with a similer discussion.The problem is not with the pollitical/religious debates but the members who can't respect the posters/members viewpoint,and lower themselves to petty insults,its also rather dissapointing when the insults come from older well respected members.Like someone said the older members such as ourselves are supposed to set an example for the newer ones.
I'm quite obviously against banning any kind of free speech and debate and would encourage respectfull open opinions from all members,I don't see why we need to ban certain kind of topics?..just because some member does'nt have the ability to make a respectfull comment without having to resort to insults and mocking the poster..If anything that member should be locked out of that discussion..But having said that most topics of discussion are decent and respectfull and the vast majority of members can carry themselves in a debate without having to make petty comments.
I think the nature in which such topics are discussed needs to be addressed and not the actual Topics themselves.
[addsig] |
*Jojo*
Joined: Oct 15, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
As they say . . . PEOPLE 'quarrel' / HAVE different opinions if they START talking about:
1. Religion
2. Politics
3. Money
4. Woman
5. Food
and the LATEST in the survey is:
6. Nokia Fones !
[addsig] |
dave_uk
Joined: Mar 06, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: London, UK
PM |
I'm all in favour of a complete ban. It's not a question of free speech - it's a question of an inappropriate "forum" for such subject matter.
They are always posted by the same people, usually, as has already been identified, as opinion marketed as fact. No wonder it's the same people defending their right to free speech. I believe a certain Abu Hamza thought he had the right to spout vile, racial hatred-inciting vitriol, using the same justification. He ended up where he belongs, and where all those who attempt to stimulate the same sort of feelings, however clever the disguise, also belong, IMHO.
Now:
"I love Nokia more than life itself" - Discuss. 
|
Pradhika
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: India
PM |
Such discussions are like itching spots on our skin. Enjoy while scratching which paves the way to sensation of burning.
This message was posted from a J300 |
dave_uk
Joined: Mar 06, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: London, UK
PM |
What a great analogy!
|
|
|
Posted: 2006-03-17 19:30
