Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Fascists and heretics, the lot of ya!

Im a heretic,so,i hate it when people start to burn me becuase i dont worship some fake god/godess.I dotn think it belongs.

I feel very strongly about this.

OT is the socializing section of Dakka. Part of being in a community with other people is a diversity of opinions. That includes opinions about touchy subjects like religion and politics. I have found myself embroiled in both. As a practicing Catholic, I have taken the time to ignore flaming from self-proclaimed believers and non-believers alike and have tried to reasonably discuss my faith. The result? Most of the time, when I'm not a jerk other people aren't jerks to me. Politics is a bit trickier. I find myself just having to keep my mouth shut. Even so, I don't think that Dakka should shrink it's space for open and frank discussion. It's true that some threads are doomed to be insulting and uselessly provocative from the start. But that's what we have mods for. And if there aren't enough that can patrol/are willing to trawl OT for politics and religion threads then I volunteer.

I'm with Manchu on this. There are a number of people here who want to, or are willing to discuss these topics in a relatively level headed way, and there will always be someone within the community who "just wants to know x" about a religion, belief or political subject.

I personally feel that while there are people who go out of control and generally try to start fires, there is also a problem from the other end, with over zealous modding (granted, this is nowhere near as common and generally more intelligible than most flames ) regards politics and especially religion.

There definately needs to be a clearer line between "this person is abusing what I think and believe under the guise of free speach" (as much as speach is free within the confines of polite society and the Dakka T&C) and "I do not share this belief, but I will defend their right to communicate it in a rational way".

Spot on Manchu

I would add that most of the world's problems largely stem from religious and political intolerance. Internet forums are the ideal place to tackle and deconstruct extreme views with reasoned discussion.

And if you don't want to take part, the ability to leave said discussion is only a click away.

Manchu +1

While there is a fair amount of trolling and flamewars, I've seen plenty of avid and even enlightening discussions on such topics in the OT forum, even if I didn't necessarily agree with them.

I could say more, but really Manchu and the following posts nailed it for me.

To "ban" political and religous in the OT forum would be creepy, because later when you lock threads and ban people because they keep posting their religous and political beliefs in the OT (where this rightly belongs) it would be the same as pissing on most Constitutions of countries all over the world, like "Freedom of Speech" and "Freedom of Religion". You just have to accept that there is always some flame around these topics.

I don't see the problem, frankly. If people want to post on those subjects, let them. IMO the Off-Topic forum keeps dakkadakka a more interesting website.

Ppl already made up their mind what to believe in before they click a thread.

I dont believe it'll effect anything , but sure it'll get messy -_-

LunaHound wrote:Ppl already made up their mind what to believe in before they click a thread.

Not always. Some people are sitting on the fence, or will come into a thread with certain ideas which they may see to be wrong or inaccurate due to factual evidence shown within the course of the thread.

For example, during the course of a (fairly) recent discussion on global warming, I discovered a number of facts and theories that I was not aware of that swayed my mind in a number of ways.

And as I mentioned, there will be people who just want to know peoples points of views and the reasons behind them, who either have no real view on the subject but want to learn what others think, or people who want to be convinced one way or the other.

Besides which, the only way to stem the tide of ignorance is with frank and open discussion. No matter what you say, there will always be at least one person who is offended by it, but you cannot shut down all communication because of that. The best way, in my view, is to try to encorage people to leave the language and as many emotions as possible at the door and try to discuss things in as civil way as possible.

Yes ur right silvermk2 , i should be asleep xD

Freedom of speech, the most important thing in any civilised society, and the thing the religious zealots in the USA love to crow on about...

Unless your pointing out how many negative things can come out of religion. Then they DEMAND your silence.

Hypocricy sickens me, and its one of the reasons i am so vocally critical of the religious. Freedom of speech unless you agree with me!

It would be funny if it didnt make me want to vomit.

I vote for more moderation, not necessarily censorship - but just strong reminders to be polite.
Also perhaps the most opinionated and conservative of your moderators (Frazz) should keep his opinions to himself while posting under his moderator account. Personal opinions are fine, but when you're acting as a representative for a larger entity, it isn't wise to let personal opinions interfere.
It would be great for the site if those discussions were taken elsewhere. I honestly don't go to the off topic forum anymore because my personal views differ so greatly from the majority, and I feel like my voice will drown in all of the hate, so I don't bother.
In short, keep 'em, but only if you can control them better.

On the whole "Freedom of Speech" and "Democracy" things, as they pertain to Dakka Dakka?

NEITHER really apply in the end.

At least, not on a privately (for all intents and purposes) owned Forum on the Internet.

This is much more of an "Enlightened Dictatorship", or some such!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Owain wrote:Here's a thought:

Do we have room for separate forums for religion and politics? A gaming-centered forum I sometimes frequent has the following:

"The Political Mudpit:
Use this forum to discuss current events and specific individuals in politics today."

"Ethos, Mores, et Monastica:
Discuss ethics, morals, religion and philosophy in here."
Furthermore, they have a special forum specifically reserved for debating. Does Dakka have the resources to pull this off?

I think it would be unwise to ban such discussions. While based on the discussion of wargaming, DakkaDakka is still a community. As such, its members should have opportunities to discuss a wide variety of topics with this community.

Actually, this doesn't sound like a bad idea...

That way, the OT Forum can return to being about books, TV, movies, comics, etc. and the Other Off Topic Forum (TBD) can be about politics and religion?

Maybe...

People keep misperceiving. I'm never posting as a Mod unless I say I'm posting as a Mod. Then its all angry bite bite BLOOD THERE'S JUST SO MUCH BLOOD!

I think OT should be subdivided into 27 subsections. That way, when I enter each subsection, its just me and the poor unfortunate innocently reading something there. Let us all bask in the sweet image of Frazzled, running amok, one subdirectory at a time.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

That way, the OT Forum can return to being about books, TV, movies, comics, etc. and the Other Off Topic Forum (The House of Pain) can be about politics and religion?

Maybe...

Name suggestion, complete.

He who breaks the Law, must go to the House of Pain!

mattyrm wrote:Freedom of speech, the most important thing in any civilised society, and the thing the religious zealots in the USA love to crow on about...

Unless your pointing out how many negative things can come out of religion. Then they DEMAND your silence.

Hypocricy sickens me, and its one of the reasons i am so vocally critical of the religious. Freedom of speech unless you agree with me!

It would be funny if it didnt make me want to vomit.

Is it me, or is this a perfect example of the problem in the OT forum?

Manchu wrote:OT is the socializing section of Dakka. Part of being in a community with other people is a diversity of opinions. That includes opinions about touchy subjects like religion and politics.

While having a community of people does certainly mean that you wind up with a bunch of people with differing opinions, in social situations in real life, people are more likely to either not discuss religion or politics at all (due to understanding that it tends to lead to arguments) or at the very least not push it too far (due to understanding that this may result in bodily harm).

The internet allows people much more freedom to 'tell it like it is' without having to worry about the repercussions... and so these topics are pretty much doomed to descend into silliness.

Locclo wrote:Personally, I agree that they just need to be a bit more strictly moderated.

This seems to be a recurring theme in this thread... Something to consider on that: The Dakka moderators signed up for the job because Dakka is a part of their hobby. As a wargaming site.

While OT has become a part of that site, it's a minor one. It's not the focus of the site, nor is it at all interesting for a lot of us ('us' as in dakka users, rather than just mods specifically).

Asking for the mods to waste more of their time in that one subsection of the site that has nothing to do with why they actually came here in the first place seems like a much worse idea than simply asking people not to discuss contentious issues, as it means less time for them to spend productively on the parts of the site that actually matter to the hobby.

The Off-topic section should be a place to chat about non-gaming stuff that interests you. Not a political and religious debate board. There are political and religious forums for that.

agnosto wrote:I agree that such "discussions" should be actively discouraged if for no other reason than the fact that it is impossible for most people to separate their emotions from their beliefs. If someone has invested a great deal of emotion into whatever they believe, they are automatically defensive when someone questions their belief and prone to striking out (in written form here).

I agree with this wholeheartedly.

I do believe they should remain, if only to keep such discussions away from other forums.

Bottom line:

When people cross into crass accusations and mudflinging that is not in a humorous or good natured way (find any such beast- I dare you!), you must intervene, or else you get thread spams with nothing inherently good about the conversation or the nature of the discussion.

Freedom of the intrawebs is not freedom as defined by a US Constitution. We are guests in a person's house, and if shouting fire over and over again offends the host, we get kicked out. That is how the forum should treat people who continue to hurt others in how they present their point of view or attempt to sway others with insults and slander.

Manchu wrote:I feel very strongly about this.

OT is the socializing section of Dakka. Part of being in a community with other people is a diversity of opinions. That includes opinions about touchy subjects like religion and politics. I have found myself embroiled in both. As a practicing Catholic, I have taken the time to ignore flaming from self-proclaimed believers and non-believers alike and have tried to reasonably discuss my faith. The result? Most of the time, when I'm not a jerk other people aren't jerks to me. Politics is a bit trickier. I find myself just having to keep my mouth shut. Even so, I don't think that Dakka should shrink it's space for open and frank discussion. It's true that some threads are doomed to be insulting and uselessly provocative from the start. But that's what we have mods for. And if there aren't enough that can patrol/are willing to trawl OT for politics and religion threads then I volunteer.

While I don't agree with all of the above, most of it is spot on.
What we're allowed and not allowed to do is up to Dakka's owner, but if he doesn't mind then I think it would be best if we have the freedom to talk about whatever we like. Not being able to talk about religion and politics is a little extreme.
Facts:
1) Some of the posters on Dakka are often inflammatory with their posts.
2) Threads about religion and politics are more likely to be locked than others.
3) Politics and religion are touchy subjects for many of us, but most would prefer to be able to at least explain their own views.
4)Moderators usually only lock threads when there is good reason to.

Why take away the freedom to post threads on these subjects? While they almost certainly don't pertain to wargaming, neither do all the other threads in OT. If OT is going to be removed, then by all means, politics and religion don't need to be a subject for discussion. But while threads on the Old Spice commercials and other useless subjects are open, there is no need to close the threads that could be potentially useful to users on Dakka, who for whatever reason have questions or observations to state. No one has ever proven anything by getting angry, and the users that purposefully try to incite others to anger are usually ignored, and regarded as having nothing useful to say.

In short, they're not much of a problem. Let them stay, and hopefully the moderators will be able to cope as they always have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

WarOne wrote:Bottom line:

When people cross into crass accusations and mudflinging that is not in a humorous or good natured way (find any such beast- I dare you!), you must intervene, or else you get thread spams with nothing inherently good about the conversation or the nature of the discussion.

Freedom of the intrawebs is not freedom as defined by a US Constitution. We are guests in a person's house, and if shouting fire over and over again offends the host, we get kicked out. That is how the forum should treat people who continue to hurt others in how they present their point of view or attempt to sway others with insults and slander.

Sounds good to me.

I can see a couple of specific arguments for banning OT discussions of politics and religion.

(1) This is a wargaming site. Go somewhere else to talk about politics and religion.

I guess we should have no more posting on RPGs, video games, fan fiction, etc, etc, if we follow this reductive logic. But that would be silly. Because people who are interested in wargaming often are also interested in those things. Many of them also happen to be interested in politics and religion. Pretty simple point, really. But there is something more subtle at work here. Dakka is not a just one shop in a mall of fora. It is a real and complete community unto itself. Some users, like myself, do not frequent other boards because Dakka is so very complete. To me, that is this site's second greatest strength. It's first greatest strength lies in the people who are already gathered together here. To wit, I don't discuss wargaming here merely because I just want to spread my opinions around. Rather, I post about wargaming on Dakka because I am interested in what other Dakka users think. Let me clarify: I not simply interested in what the kind of people who post on a page like Dakka think; no, I mean I am interested in what the specific posters (like Albatross, dogma, JEB, H.B.M.C., RedBeard, KilKrazy, Frazzled, Gwar, and on and on and on) actually using this site think. Similarly, I do not discuss religion and politics in the OT just to throw up my ideas like a blog. Rather, I am genuinely interested in what my Dakka buddies have to say. The argument in favor of banning political and religious discussion in OT seems to assume that every mention of these topics is only flame bait and nothing more. It also seems to assume that most users have no interest in actual dialog and only want to scream for the sake of screaming. In my experience, that is not usually the case. Certainly not enough to place a great burden on mods. Which brings me to the next specific argument . . .

(2) Mods don't have the time to monitor OT religion/politics threads.

This is like saying mods don't have time to do their jobs. Pretty unconvincing. I understand that this sentiment is plugged into "this is a wargaming site only" mentality but in point of fact, as I hope to have just demonstrated, this is NOT a "wargaming only site"; instead it is a "primarily wargaming site." I am not trying to understate the amount of work mods have to do in other sections of Dakka. If it is the case that there needs to be someone devoted to OT in order to prevent a ban on discussions of politics and religion then I again volunteer to do so. Saying that the problem of mods being overworked in more "on point" sections of Dakka can only be solved by banning discussions of politics and religion is weak on its face. First, there are certainly other solutions. Second, even if a ban is introduced mods will still have to trawl OT to lock threads that either start as or eventually become about politics and religion. So I think we should drop this argument for banning religious/political discussions altogether.

(3) Dakka users are too immature to have productive discussions about contentious topics.

First, let's assume this is true. If that's the case, then shut down YMDC immediately. Surely half of all mods' work will suddenly disappear. I know the immediate retort will be "but that's at least a wargaming topic" . . . well, I've already responded to this in the first paragraph: Dakka users are not merely wargamers.

Second--and I think more accurately--let's admit that this isn't true. Many of Dakka's regulars are in fact mature enough to talk about religion and politics without going bezerk. This even applies to the younger ones. Yes, there are exceptions. But these people are repeat offenders whose conduct constitutes a pretty tiny portion of what goes on in OT and at large. Let me very clearly emphasize this point to the cynical among Dakka's users and mods: 90% of the time or more flaming is not a result of the particular topic but rather a result of miscommunicated hostility; as soon as one party cools off and extends his/her metaphorical hand, the other party is almost always willing to shake it. I hate to say it, but mods are not always giving the best example in this regard. Neither are some of the regulars, for which we should take responsibility and commit to working harder at. If there are people who are not willing to reconcile and want to keep fighting then let's deal with them rather than blaming this poor behavior on a certain category of topics for discussion.

I find it amazing how many people actually condone censorship If it has its own "channel" and it stays there then I don't really care. As others have said, this is a community and sometimes we might want to talk about other things, if we talk about them in the right places its all good in my opinion.

For those that don't think "You Make Da Call" isn't a religious discussion though, you just don't like Warhammer enough then

Threads get closed for the slightest notion of being "rude". I simply can't comprehend subjects such as these not creating emotional responses and "hurt feelings". Stuff like this creates creates tensions between members throughout the board.

Byte wrote:Threads get closed for the slightest notion of being "rude". I simply can't comprehend subjects such as these not creating emotional responses and "hurt feelings". Stuff like this creates tensions between members throughout the board.

Having participated in one thread about vegetarianism a few weeks ago, I'd have to disagree with you. While I didn't express myself or my views, or my reasons very clearly at first, I didn't find that by the time the thread was off the most recent threads page that there was any tension between myself, or any other participants. In this particular case, there were several people getting a bit inflamed, but I think that everyone realizes that one small conversation over the internet with people you've never met is no reason to change your life drastically for the worse, or your views of these people.

i voted yes, but would preffer an "other." there should be an sub forum in off topic for religous/political reasons.

Nightwatch wrote:

Byte wrote:Threads get closed for the slightest notion of being "rude". I simply can't comprehend subjects such as these not creating emotional responses and "hurt feelings". Stuff like this creates tensions between members throughout the board.

Having participated in one thread about vegetarianism a few weeks ago, I'd have to disagree with you. While I didn't express myself or my views, or my reasons very clearly at first, I didn't find that by the time the thread was off the most recent threads page that there was any tension between myself, or any other participants. In this particular case, there were several people getting a bit inflamed, but I think that everyone realizes that one small conversation over the internet with people you've never met is no reason to change your life drastically for the worse, or your views of these people.

Obviously you didn't understand my post. I have seen a thread get closed for basically one member calling another a "rules lawyer" and "trying to be argumentative". Maybe the off topic forum has more leeway. If so this isn't fair to the rest of the forums. However, no where did I imply people lives were going to be affected drastically from any posts... give me a break dude...really?

Keep-Yes, because you should allow for people to govern themselves while in an open area. I imagine the burden on moderation is heavier in areas like this, and moderation could easily become subjective on topics like that.

Other than scribbles on public toilet walls this is the last form of Democracy we have, why ban it? And for those that are not interested in other people's thoughts on the topic, eh! Ignore the post. I for one am a HUGE poli-sci fan (enough to volunteer regularly in political campaigns) but I avoid striking up or looking for a philosophical discussion on here because that is not why I come to Dakka. I urge those in favor of banning politics and religion to follow suite, that way you ban it in your world while not infringing on the interests of others. Be your OWN moderator!

I voted no, for many of the reasons Manchu has noted.

Political discussions on Dakka aren't that bad. Dogma and sebster regularly post useful thoughts, and there are many other users who are worth reading. The fact that the forum isn't primarily a political forum helps to filter out a lot of the fanatics looking to argue.

Then you have the problem of politics overarching into other topics. Posts about the economy, guns, crime, differences between nations, recent events, animals, history, the military, and a dozen other things are liable to touch upon politics, and they either become swamped by people who have no other opportunity to say something or get locked down far too frequently.

Plus, what else are you going to read on the Off Topic forum? Another "what music do you like" thread? More "what do you think of the new not-in-any-way-politically-charged movie that's out" threads? More zombie apocalypse scenarios? There's only so much else to discuss.

I don't generally find religious discussions to be interesting; they seem to go around in circles quite a bit more than political discussions, and they seem to get people more riled up. Still, I probably wouldn't want to ban their discussion, I'm sure some people find them worthwhile.

It's not like it's particularly difficult to decide not to click on a thread when it looks like it will have political or religious connotations; and since that thread wouldn't exist if threads with political or religious connotations were prohibited, what are you losing by their presence? A second of time as you look for a thread you'd rather read?