Only in the barbecue pit would a simple statement like Ed’s turn into a 20+ poster…
Melin:
Thanks for the cite. Interesting.
I think it’s a bad decision, however. (In much the same way they made a REALLY bad decision regarding suing sitting presidents) and not applicable in this instance in any case. Seeking out a discussion board like this one and reading topics that you select yoruself doesn’t in any way compare with public broadcasting over the radio airwaves. On TOP of which, I dont’ think witnessing compares to whatever the FCC was calling “indecent” speech.
So I guess it comes down to where and when and individual has a right to be “left alone”, which, by the way, is not the same as a right not to be “bothered”. I am deeply bothered by many things, but I am pretty much left alone by all of them.
A for Effort, however.
Stoidela
Boycott shampoo! Demand REAL poo!
Why? Just like you don’t have to read the board, or open a thread, you don’t have to turn on the television or radio, and and you can change the station.
I don’t think there’s a difference in this context. The legal priniciple is analogous.
Gee, thanks.
-Melin
I am disappointed that a forum dedicated to “stamping out ignorance” would try and place restrictions on this sort of exchange. I’d think the teeming millions could sift through this morass themselves, and let the “free exchange of ideas” prevail.
How will “strictly factual inquiries” about faith and religion be defined? Will a rebuttal to a flippant question or comment about a specific faith or religion be deleted? What about athiests? Will thier attempts to “proselyze,” inentional or not, be deleted as well?
I can also see the arbitrary weighing of whether material is “relevant” to the discussion or not, seeing the tortured twists and turns threads tend to take on this board.
What you folks are really looking for is a “Christian Twit filter.” Perhaps cautioning such “twits” that they are over the line might help; you could always ban their posts if they fail to comply.
Being an evangelical, charismatic-type Christian, I am into witnessing and evangelism in a big way. But the real forum for that is face to face, in the give and take of real-time relationships, with the involvement of every aspect of your life. Internet BBs are a poor place to “witness,” particularly in a forum like this. A Christian witness has to be credible. Its awfully hard to get there exclusively on-line.
Plus, I’ve never seen anyone convinced of God’s truth via argument anyway. Jesus commanded us to love our neighbor. The verb used by Christ to “command” his followers to spread the gospel (“Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel”) is not actually a command, but sort of an afterthought. The implied meaning of the passage is “while you’re out there,” or “while you’re on your way,” “preach the gospel.” This says to me that the Christ’s message has little relevance without some kind of selfless act or attitude of service or friendship to accompany it.
SoxFan59
“Its fiction, but all the facts are true!”
Sorry. I hit “enter” before I was finished.
The Board has the right to relegate certain kinds of communications wherever they wish it to go. I will do my best to comply. In my opinion, it will not work well.
But, as I tried to explain, the kind of proselytizing you folks are trying to ban is more in the “twit” category. Good natured sharing about heart-felt issues should never rise to such a level.
A final question. Would the discussion in my previous post violate this new policy if placed in a thread that had nothing to do with religion, but the discussion had meandered over there?
SoxFan59
“Being a Chicago Cubs fan is now a qualifying condition under the Americans with Disabilities Act.”
I think that a VERY important function of this board is the exchange of ideas. I have argued with Ex-Tank and others, but I have learned from them also. The trouble with “witnessing”(gohd, I hate that phrase!) is that the statement is made, others question the statement, and instead of answers, we get the same statement over and over and over.
There is no exchange of ideas, and any questioning of the original statement is called hateful and evil.
Well, they’ve pushed C#3’s button again. Bang, zoom, pow! Mr. 3, your posts are ubiquitous on this board, making your claim that you’ve been censored somehow less than credible. And yes, I have been following your whole “drama”. I must say, some of the problem you brought on yourself, based on my attempt at impartial reading of the history. You’ve made some vicious personal attacks on people, which I think is unwarranted in this forum. On the other hand, while I don’t often agree with what you have to say, you always are fun to read. That being said…
On to the topic at hand.
-
The owners and managers of the board have the right to censor if they want to. This brings to mind the saying, “freedom of the press is for people who own one.”
-
In my opinion, the persons running this board are not censoring anyone through the use of this policy. All they have said is, if you want to witness, do it in the correct place. How is that different from saying, “If you want to flame, do it in the BBQ Pit”?
-
Question for the moderators/administrators: Is inappropriate witnessing such a big problem that an individual policy is necessary. Have you been deleting lots of witness messages from unrelated topics? I read a large portion of the board on a daily basis, and I haven’t noticed many (if any) witness posts in non-religious threads. Granted, you may be removing them before I get there, but, hey was there really a big problem?
Finally, Sox Fan sed…
Right on brother! Does anybody really think they’re going to argue somebody else to a new religion? To plagarize Kurt Vonnegut, “Argue about religion? You might as well write an anti-glacier book.”
President of the Vernon Dent fan club.
Melin:
There have always been rules that apply to the public airwaves because they are public. The internet is closer to HBO than ABC.
And I disagree completely. You seem to be saying that someone saying “suck my dick” and someone saying “Jesus loves you” are equivalent. And if so, I think you need to take a look at your hostility towards religion.
Slythe:
You’ve just described what happens with any topic that people feel strongly about. Why is religion so different? I’m not religious in he least, but I think Sox and C3 have it exactly right about what’s going on.
Now that I think about it, why did the complainers get this polilcy instituted? Did they stop to consider the number of people who did NOT complain, and felt more than capable of dealing with any witnessing they encountered?
Stoidela
Boycott shampoo! Demand REAL poo!
SoxFan59:
I dunno. I don’t think I’ve ever seen you post anything similar to the express soap-box declamation from Arg/Adam that triggered all this hoopla. (My objection is that Adam-style rantings should be relegated to the “Mundane and Pointless” swamp and leave those “GD” threads alone.) You, Dex, Rowan, Mike Koenecke, St. Pat, Melin, Phil, and I (among many others) have posted both “religious facts” and “religious beliefs” here and on the old AOL/SDMB. The difference (and it is clear in my mind, at least) is that we generally lay out our beliefs and let it rest. Challenges are met with “This is the background and this is our rationale.” Once in a great while, Snarkberry/Bill would post an affirmation of some LDS position–and then get all (needlessly) apologetic about it. Bill hasn’t posted actual proselytizing in over year.
Adam specifically launched an emotional sermon filled with “Do THIS or go to Hell!” comments. At that point, in what may have been overkill, management specified that that type of post should be kept in the Debates Forum. I think religious topics are still open for discussion on any appropriate forum. I suspect that the new rule may be more regulation than is strictly needed, but I don’t see any signs of censorship.
Tom~
[[Plus, I’ve never seen anyone convinced of God’s truth via argument anyway.]]
Well, now we’re talkin’! <g>
Board Monitors have had discussions amongst themselves, and I think I can reasonably speak for most (we may disagree on details, and different forums have different degrees of leniency.) We are not hired as Monitors to censor, nor to impose arbitrary rules, nor to exert tyrannical power. We are trying to see to it that everyone has fun. If there is a disruptor causing others not to have fun here, then we have to decide whether to take action and what action to take.
Our general push has been towards helping make the Boards more usable. Things like categories for posts – encouraging flaming to happen in the BBQ pit, the addition of the Great Debates forum. These were actually suggested by Members, and we thought they were good ideas. Someone who dislikes flaming never needs to bother reading the BBQ Pit, for instance.
The use of categories is not intended as censorship, but as helping the majority of readers find the kinds of posts they are interested in reading… and avoid the kinds of posts they are not interested in reading.
We have had complaints about the witnessing, and therefore we came up with a policy. This is not an arbitrary whim on our part, but on account of complaints from readers. Our policy is not censorship, we are not prohibiting witnessing, but we would like to try to confine it to a forum. That seems to be the best way to keep everyone reasonably happy.
Do we anticipate that this will work? We dunno, that’s up to you guys, whether you will help with such policies. The BBQ Pit is working fairly well, so the Great Debates forum. That’s because you’re posting topics in the appropriate category/forum. If it doesn’t work, what will we do? We dunno.
We have allowed some pretty … um… aggressive language. Again, the last thing we want to do is have to censor or edit. That’s damn hard work. We have drawn the line at a few instances of language that we thought was inappropriate and way across the line. We have left others, including the post where someone accused the Monitors of having sexual encounters with their female parents.
We have drawn the line at situations where we felt there might be legal implications (such as potential lawsuits.)
Again, our purpose is that people have a good time here, come back, post often, and buy Cecil’s books. We do not have brown shirts, we do not have hobnailed boots (well, except for RenFair costumes, perhaps), and we do not enjoy having to be confrontational with offenders.
OK, that’s my two cents.
This being the BBQ Pit, I was gonna say uncomplimentary things about people who don’t have a clue, but on second thought, it ain’t worth the waste of pixels.
Wow. I can’t believe that Ed’s original post got ANY response, much less 30+ posts. But then again, you people LOVE to argue don’t you.
The new policy on witnessing is fair enough. If I want to go for it, they've given me a place to do so. (Obviously anybody can too, but it seems that I've started this whole thing, eh?)
Anyway, I've seen that witnessing on this board is pointless. And that's an understatment. I'd have a much better shot if I were face to face, and you could see my actions, and see my emotion...etc.
Ok, you're all free to continue arguing.
Adam
Oh my god! When my local paper published my letter to the editor, they didn’t put it in the comics page like I wanted! They said it had to go in the “Letters to the Editors” section! That’s censorship! I’m gonna sue!
Organization is good. Now I can find all the witnessing I want to read all in one place! Finally, I don’t have to go searching all over the board for that one witty post that claimed “No one comes to the Father except through Him.” Thanks you, SDMB staff.
Your Quadell
Thanks for explaining the process, C.K. I apologize for taking offense. I personally interpret my posts in religious discussions as “witnessing” (like slythe, I don’t like the term, being an attorney), because I feel compelled to share my faith out of love and concern for my friends, and, even those who would consider themselves my “enemies.” So I guess I thought the “witnessing” ban was more general, and aimed at Christians generally. I apologize for overreacting.
Then again, even Jesus knew his audience. As I said in a previous post, its hard to be real personal on the internet or a message board. On the other hand, I think I could get into a discussion or debate on religious issues with you, the folks Tom mentioned (and maybe Bob too!) and have a great time, even if we disagree. That’s more because we’ve become more like friends over the time we’ve participated on the board, and we understand where we each stand on these issues, and can talk about them less confrontationally. My hope would always be that those I meet along the way come to know the Lord, but, like I said, it won’t be MY clever argument that convinces them.
Sincerely,
SoxFan59
“May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.” Romans 15:13
Wow, C3 has replaced Alan Kingsley and John the Optamissed-ic Cyberian as head of the SDMB Secret Cabal Paranoia Resistance. I wondered who would be the first.
The thing that cracks me up is the explicit assumption that all the moderators are of like mind, persuasion and tendencies. Lynn, Tuba, Dex and the rest are all as different as they are alike. I don’t even believe, IIRC, that any two of them practice the same religion.
C3, have you looked into Zoloft or something?
Ha! I was thinking of Kingsley just this morning while reading this thread, but had forgotten about the optimist. Thanks, pld!
I’m still just absolutely amazed at the “censorship!” cry when I hear it in this type of forum. Of course “censorship” is happening. Censorship of this kind happens every day, every minute. When someone is talking to a friend at a coffee shop and you overhear the conversation and decide that the guy talking is a jerk, and you decide not to walk over and say, “you know, you’re a jerk,” you’ve just “censored” yourself. Why? Because you have complete control over your mouth (we hope), and you felt that the comment was inappropriate for the situation. When one of the board moderators finds a post that is offensive in some way and the people in charge of the website get together and decide that it should be pulled, they’ve just “censored” it. Why? Because they have complete control over the website, and decided that the post was inappropriate for the situation.
But “censored” in a this-is-outrageous-and-illegal-and-Orwellian kind of way? What nonsense. If you want to argue that certain posts should not be pulled or that certain posters should be allowed to post even though all they’ve done is troll, fine, make the argument: the post wasn’t that offensive, if people want to read past it they can, the poster is actually a nice guy, whatever. But please stop being so stupid as to think that the first amendment applies and should be a part of that argument.
Rich
Well, I must say that, based on some of the religious posts I’ve read, I’m glad to see some control. I’m not debating legalities or whatever; mostly I’m glad 'cause, as a Christian, some of the posting done by well-meaning people has left me embarrassed. I know they mean well and they are doing what they feel is right, but the minute you start debating with someone on something of such a deeply personal nature, you’re going to talk apples and oranges.
I agree with Sox:
I’ve been reading alot of CS Lewis nowadays, and he’s brought me a long way in understanding Christianity and its place in personal and social life.
There ya go: my .02 and keep the change.
Carry on, people!
…it has never been my way to bother much about things which you can’t cure.
- A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court-Mark Twain
Why is this such a hard concept for some of you to grasp? (GAWD - some of you look pathetically paranoid.)
(1) Just like General Questions, flames, and MPSIMS, it has been determined by the powers that be, that witnessing be contained in one area and not puked through out the MB. All other topics are categorized, why should this one be any different?
Please review the meaning of the word “censorship” and explain how it pertains to Mr. Zotti’s post.
(2) The SD is privately owned and they can pretty much decide who or what is allowed.
Although I don’t feel the need to be protected from Arg’s drivel, I thank the board monitors for containing it in one area.
My online time is precious and putting it all in one area helps prevent wasted time wading through the witnessing BS unless I chose to.
(3) SHEESH!
>^,^<
KITTEN
He who walk through airport door sideways going to Bangkok. - Confucius
Hey, Melin, “Bitch lawyer,” please answer this one for me–especially if you’re in CA. One of the neighbors in my mobile home park had his place burn down! Fortunately he wasn’t in it at the time. The park management fenced it off and ordered him not to come back to salvage anything. Isn’t this a miscarriage of law and human rights?
::gasp, snicker, snort::
This has GOT to be the funniest thing I have read on this board yet! ::giggle::
Hey guys – 'specially you old board regs – Stoidela thinks I’m hostile to religion! ::chuckle::
Honey, I get in bed with it every night!
-Melin
Phenomenal woman
Bitch Corporate Lawyer
That's me