Request for Input - SubForums and Mission Statement

[DaveC426913]

Support your poll with rational argument.

I challenge the bigotry you have shown in your poll.

Seriously, justify that narrowminded, bigoted, ignorant bullshit.

Let's try to maintain a civilized discussion. You're entitled to challenge as enthusiastically as you wish, and to demand defense, but please do so while keeping a civil tongue in your head. Not every discussion has to be trolled.

 

[sweetpea]

MOD HAT ON.
All mods report to the headmaster's office now.

 

[DaveC426913]

That being said, I think Tiassa is attempting to move the goalposts that Kitt set in the OP.
In my view, this thread was not intended to encompass the entirety of the issue that is the alleged problem with SciFo. It is addressing a specific issue, which has its roots firmly planted in earlier discussion about whether this is a science forum or not, and whether the rules should change to meet that- and that specifically.

 

[Seattle]

Let's not miss a chance to become unglued however. It's such an important issue.

 

[Kittamaru]

Support your poll with rational argument.

I challenge the bigotry you have shown in your poll.

Seriously, justify that narrowminded, bigoted, ignorant bullshit.

Considering you are the only one going off the deep end I don't see any reason to "justify" your absurd claims to you.

That being said, I think Tiassa is attempting to move the goalposts that Kitt set in the OP.
In my view, this thread was not intended to encompass the entirety of the issue that is the alleged problem with SciFo. It is addressing a specific issue, which has its roots firmly planted in earlier discussion about whether this is a science forum or not, and whether the rules should change to meet that- and that specifically.

Pretty much, though this kind of reaction is exactly why this conversation has gone exactly nowhere in the last half a decade or so it keeps being used as a defense for doing nothing at all. I dare say, there is a reason we've gone from a dozen or more active, knowledgeable, and experienced moderators to the three that remain in the span of a few years. Perhaps the futility of it in the face of absolute apathy is part of why?

 

[Tiassa]

Let's try to maintain a civilized discussion. You're entitled to challenge and demand defense, but please do so while keeping a civil tongue in your head. Not every discussion has to be trolled.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, Dave, what's new? What's that? Let's try to maintain civility in the face of bigotry?

So, you're on. Explain what about bigotry is civilized. It's time you did so.

If you cannot, then stuff the pretense.

That being said, I think Tiassa is attempting to move the goalposts that Kitt set in the OP.

The problem is reiterated by the inability to recognize the problem.

That is to say, let us be clear: The idea of whether or not Sciforums is a science forum↗ has been answered resoundingly. We have, over the years, in pursuit of what was apparently some stupid lie about rational discourse and being fair, cultivated some serious bigotry.

Compared to other bigotries, perhaps this particular one doesn't seem so nasty; it does, after all, have its origins in a justified reaction against injustice.

Note the poll.

Consider the elements examined: Why are "Fringe" and "Religion" repeatedly juxtaposed?

Because they are grouped in the perspective of one who disdains them, presupposes according to his own aesthetics, and cannot justify through rational argument such a juxtaposition without falling back to hatemongering a priori. That's the immediate point, right there.

If calling bullshit on bigotry is "attempting to move the goalposts", then I consider my larger point about cultivating bigotry in this community only further and more clearly illustrated.

So, yeah, tellyawhat: When "Bigfoot" rolls an empire, come talk to me about superstition and conspiracism as religion.

(Actually, truth told, it will more likely be EBE, regardless of the actual state of the search for life elsewhere in the Universe. But EBE believe will likely evolve into religion proper before that happens; then again, we're probably a century out at the very least. Nor can I predict what happens when we find life at the Jovian or Galilean systems, but EBE is rising. And just wait 'til FSM concretizes. We could be looking at the future post-Abramist triad: EBE vs. FSM vs. Antireligiosity. And that's about as much of a midpoint offering as I can manage; as near as I can tell, should it happen that we might live so long as to witness such outcomes, plenty of my neighbors asserting antireligious identity politics will be perfectly sanguine, because what they meant, the whole time, was that they wanted to feel like they were in charge of religion. But, yeah, until then—and, really, barring significant change in human lifespan resulting from factors yet unforeseen, it ain't happening during our lives—let me know when Temple of Squatch overturns which major world government for what reasons.)​

 

[DaveC426913]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, Dave, what's new? What's that? Let's try to maintain civility in the face of bigotry?
So, you're on. Explain what about bigotry is civilized. It's time you did so.

Please identify the bigotry.

(The accusation of 'bigotry' is not in-and-of-itself uncivilized, if defensible. But you gotta add the extra stuff to make sure it's dragged it down to school yard level.)

 

[Tiassa]

Please identify the bigotry.

(The accusation of 'bigotry' is not in-and-of-itself uncivilized, if defensible. But you gotta add the extra stuff to make sure it's dragged it down to school yard level.)

Honestly, you could try responding to what is there.

Oh, right, schoolyard.

Stop making excuses.

 

[DaveC426913]

Honestly, you could try responding to what is there.

Oh, right, schoolyard.

Stop making excuses.

So, no defense of 'bigotry' then. Not necessary, I'll assume it's retracted.

My request stands. Please engage in good faith, and avoid dragging the thread into trollish mud-slinging, such as 'ignorant' and 'bullshit'.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

Anyway, I didn't vote in the poll - I'm more interested in pondering why people post what they post. But, I'd have to say that I don't/didn't like posting in a more hard science section because it was/is infested with dickheads.

 

[Kittamaru]

Ladies and Gentlemen - Sciforums.com.

Note the poll.

Consider the elements examined: Why are "Fringe" and "Religion" repeatedly juxtaposed?

Because they are grouped in the perspective of one who disdains them, presupposes according to his own aesthetics, and cannot justify through rational argument such a juxtaposition without falling back to hatemongering a priori. That's the immediate point, right there.

Try reading the poll without presuming the world is out to get you, Tiassa.

It was mentioned more than once that anything not "hard science" should go into "the Fringe". I, personally, Disagree. I think Religion should be separate, if intellectual and rational discussion can be had therein.

However, history shows us that simply isn't the case here at Sciforums.com. We have had several moderators that could charitably be called anti-religeous zealots, going so far as to repeatedly state how they have no respect for anyone stupid enough to believe in a religion.

However, in the interest of keeping my thumb off the scales, I provided those options, as James requested.

The fact that you immediately presume that means I am somehow an anti religion bigot is equal parts hilarious and pathetic, especially as I've stated my personal religious beliefs previously (and thusly been ridiculed for them).

So, Tiassa - get off your high horse, for it is naught but a squeaky rocker.

 

[DaveC426913]

Ladies and Gentlemen - Sciforums.com.

Only if we accept it.

 

[DaveC426913]

It still seems to me that the members are not the ones to make this decision.
Those who frequent the fringe fora will not want them squished down, while those who don't frequent it see no need for it to occupy so much space.
I don't think this is a case where the majority vote "wins".

It's still a matter of:
1] the forum philosophy (embrace fringe discussion or discourage it),
2] the work required by the mods - whether they can handle it, or would rather concentrate elsewhere.

 

[Kittamaru]

It still seems to me that the members are not the ones to make this decision.

I would agree with you, but our administrator disagrees... Ultimately, we take our marching orders from him.

I have tried several times to Kickstart this discussion in the back room, but nobody bothers to contribute except to say that the conversation needs to be had.

 

[DaveC426913]

I would agree with you, but our administrator disagrees... Ultimately, we take our marching orders from him.

The admin disagrees that - the members shouldn't make the decision?
Or the admin disagrees that - the fringe fora should be compacted?
Surely the latter, not the former.

 

[DaveC426913]

I do wonder if the admin has noted that leaving the fora topics wide open and then not enforcing rules and moderation may actually be causing the exact antithesis of increased forum participation?

 

[Kittamaru]

The admin disagrees that - the members shouldn't make the decision?
Or the admin disagrees that - the fringe fora should be compacted?
Surely the latter, not the former.

The administrator said to put it to the forums in the other thread (on mobile or I'd link it)

 

[Tiassa]

So, no defense of 'bigotry' then. Not necessary, I'll assume it's retracted.

My request stands. Please engage in good faith, and avoid dragging the thread into trollish mud-slinging, such as 'ignorant' and 'bullshit'.

I find it dishonest that you should keep requesting what is already there without bothering to even acknowledge it.

 

[Kittamaru]

I find it dishonest that you should keep requesting what is already there without bothering to even acknowledge it.

Tiassa, the only one behaving dishonestly here is you. You manged to totally misread a simple set of questions and made it into some weird witch hunt that simply doesn't exist. Why is that?

 

[DaveC426913]

I find it dishonest that you should keep requesting what is already there without bothering to even acknowledge it.

A guy walks onto the stage, and delivers an impassioned plea to the audience, waxing eloquent and convincing, and - just before the applause - he turns, drops his trousers and takes a dump on the stage. Later, he complains that no one is taking him seriously, calling them dishonest.

You're no fool. You know perfectly well that, if you want to be listened to, and treated with respect, you'll behave in-kind.
The corollary is also true - by trolling, you are telling your audience that you do not wish to be considered with any more respect than you offer, and that they should just mentally delete the post.

Back on topic for me. Any one here have a sincere contribution?