Most common reason to be Pitted Appears to be Dishonesty?

I haven’t seen @thorny_locust go around declaring hatred of anyone, just that racism is a problem.

But you are saying that saying that both a pickpocket and a murderer are “criminals” is saying that they’re exactly the same? REALLY? THAT is the argument you’re going with? OK, suit yourself.

No one has a problem with forgiving a repentant racist. Forgiving an active racist is like forgiving the guy currently running away with your television.

That was the general you. Hey, @Babale, do you hate racists?

Funny how people are losing their jobs over 10 year old Tweets that they already apologised for, then. (Or 33 year old articles.)

I thought it was like forgiving the guy who runs the stoplight occasionally? What sort of repentance are we talking here? Ten Hail Mary’s?

No, I don’t. I feel bad for many of them, because their racism is an expression of their ignorance or poverty; others are the result of poor upbringing or a poisonous ideology. But in none of those cases do I hate the people affected.

When people sincerely apologize, they’ve been forgiven. People “lose their mind” when instead of apologizing like a normal person your first instinct is to double down (cough cough Kevin Hart)

How about “no longer being racist” or “if called out for past racist behavior not throwing a tantrum like a toddler”?

I’m going to junior mod again and remind folks that this is ATMB and not the pit.

Actually, I’m just going to moderate. This is a pretty clear case .

Let’s stick to discussing how the message board should be run in this thread.

We could try banning all personal attacks for say 3 months and then review. See if it makes things worse or better.

But as for solving the wider problem… could we ever go back to a situation where people tolerate views they strongly disagree with, or even find repugnant?

Are there some ideas that just can’t be tolerated? I can imagine on some other board there might be a majority of posters who oppose abortion, and demand to be able to tell the few ‘baby-killers’ exactly what they think of them. Is anyone who advocates for something guilty of that thing?

You can Pit someone who is pro abortion for being pro baby killing right here on the Dope. You can tell the pro choicers exactly what you think of them, and they can do the same to you.

You can’t use someone’s specific story of abortion against them, but you also couldn’t tell a poor single mom who’s asking how to feed her kids that she should have had an abortion.

So why do you present this like it is some horrible thing that will make us all recoil and agree that the Pit needs to go?

Sometimes it helps to think of a situation from the opposite side.

From the Pro-Lifer’s point of view, Pro-Choicer’s are doing great evil by advocating, voting etc to keep abortion legal. Should they none the less tolerate them because that is important to living in a free society?

That’s veering more off topic than I can reply to here.

If anything, I think these kinds of arguments are one of the reasons why we HAVE a Pit in the first place. Stuff like this happens, they can take it to the Pit and avoid ruining the original conversation.

“Taking it to the Pit” ruins the original conversation anyways. It is ridiculous to think that there is this nice friendly debate going on over here, when there is a link to the Pit where the same two people are calling each other motherfuckers over there.

You might as well tell a kid that he can only mouth off to his mother in the dining room, because in the other rooms of the house he had better treat her with respect.

^^^^ this!

I’m going to disagree with that. Sure, the two (or more) people are still attacking each other in the other forum (PIT), but the other people who may want to continue to discuss the OP may be able to continue without their posts being buried in a half dozen or more back and forth insults. And again, it keeps the screaming matches away from where other, casuals (or first time viewers) don’t see the family fighting.

Right. So the rule should be no insults anywhere. That should harm nobody except posters who enjoy insulting other people which IMHO has no place on this board.

Were we ever there, really?

I guess you’d have to define tolerate. Is telling someone their views are repugnant intolerant?

I don’t know. I feel like society has changed for the worse in that respect, and the board with it. But you’ve been posting here a lot longer; were the arguments always so bitter, so personal?

Once again, it’s not just about being able to call someone a “motherfucker”. If you can’t understand that, I can’t help you.

Honestly, anyone who thinks that just being able to avoid calling someone names means treating them with respect…well, I’d love to live in your world.

– not replying to several things due to the mod note. The following however I think has to do specifically with how the board should be run:

Except that you appear to want to define any mention that a post has racist / bigoted implications as an insult. So the entire subject would become non-discussible – except that people who wanted to recommend behavior or policies that have the result of damaging people for their race or ethnicity would be allowed to do that; but everyone else would be forbidden to point out the likely negative results.

If you study history, you’d know that’s never been the case. People have always treated each other like crap, sadly.

If anything, things are somewhat better now in that the playing field is a lot more level than it used to be.

It gives the appearance and that’s all we can do. You have every right to dislike or even hate another poster, but in a civil society you don’t say things like that when they can hear. You can hate your boss and you can call him names at home, but it makes little sense to say that you can only do it in the break room.

I do not. If I gave that implication, it was unintended. I think that bleating “racism” is a lazy argument, but have no problem with an attack the post not the poster rule.