Sigh. I maintain that you are a religionist on the topic. Feel free to not agree. I’ll manage to get over the shock.
The one that is as homage to my Big Bigotedness. The one with my name in the title.
Yes, you were whooshed. miss elizabeth was, I believe, being sarcastic.
Regards,
Shodan
The basic mistake here is to assume that both sides have the same support were it counts, and once again accusing others of being a religionist is a card used often by woo proponents, as pointed before you are entitled to that opinion, not the facts.
- He didn’t chime in as a Moderator, nor did he even hint that he was representing the board.
- It may have been post #10, but it was only the 7th response(you had posted three times by then)-a bit early in the game to be calling it a pile-on, especially in The BBQ Pit.
I would do that before I started whining and complaining about the material I was reading. I don’t expect a book to change, so why would I expect a message board that I lurk at to change. If I found myself so pissed off by what I was reading that I felt the urge to lodge a complaint about it, I’d just go ahead and stop reading.
DAMN IT! In the name of Hercules’ heaving hemorrhoids could someone please create a sarcasm font? I can usually pick up on it but sometimes I’m so obtuse you could use me as a lawn chair. My apologies, miss elizabeth.
Everyone has their own unique tipping point, so you’re right as far as that goes.
I’m sorry; yes, it was a whoosh. I was kidding. People state those opinions all the time and no one is banned or outraged. As far as the Jesus and the soldiers thing, I’d say those are practically the majority opinion of the board. As well as disliking the two party system.
Condescending Robot is full of baloney.
For most things people do. But some ideas are too stupid to even entertain, and they get mocked. Sometimes legitimate conservative ideas get lumped in there too, and I don’t like that. But this is The Straight Dope, a message board started by a newspaper column that loved to mock ideas. The snark won’t go away until we mod this board into a black hole, and I’d argue that we shouldn’t attempt that.
No, we’re not.
ONE subforum (GQ) is for answering straight questions. The vast majority of the sub-forums are for discussion and debate, not teaching. Not everyone here is a teacher, or wants to be a teacher, or is qualified to be a teacher.
I agree the board is at it’s best when this is happening, and it’s one of the reasons I like this place. But it isn’t all, or even most, of what happens here. And honestly, it’d be a bit boring if that was the case.
I don’t understand what you mean here.
Personally, I think this board gets it right more that it gets it wrong. I guess you do too, or you wouldn’t be here. I think there is room for improvement. There are certain posters who get away with things I don’t think they should. Posters that have been here longer get modded faaaar more leniently that a new poster is. Conservatives are modded harder than libs. I agree these things happen. I agree jerkishness can be an issue. I don’t know what to do about it, but I agree it happens. I don’t think having a policy of respect for all viewpoints is good, however. It sounds nice, but in practice i think it would destroy the board.
missed this, but it’s fine. 
Maybe sarcasm isn’t the wonderful tool I thought it was… 
I’m curious who the poster child is for conservatives who got banned or silenced just for being conservative.
I think that is the point of this thread, if jerkishness was banned across the board, the board may tilt slightly less left.
Did he change his name? His name carries all kinds of implications whether or not he is posting as a moderator or not.
One way to fix that issue is to have a moderator handle and a regular posting name.
At least then, no one can claim bias or bullying by the mods.
I don’t mean literal teacher but we all have the potential to learn from each other. You might teach me why a+b=c or you might explain the finer points of why you believe that socialized medicine is best but I can learn from you as long as you are willing to make the effort to show me your reasoning.
I agree the board is at it’s best when this is happening, and it’s one of the reasons I like this place. But it isn’t all, or even most, of what happens here. And honestly, it’d be a bit boring if that was the case.
I was just trying to say that people shouldn’t be afraid to have their convictions tested and to face the possibility that what they thought was true might not be as definite.
“The chief deficiency I see in the skeptical movement is its polarization: Us vs. Them — the sense that we have a monopoly on the truth; that those other people who believe in all these stupid doctrines are morons; that if you’re sensible, you’ll listen to us; and if not, to hell with you. This is nonconstructive. It does not get our message across. It condemns us to permanent minority status.”
- Carl Sagan
“You can get into a habit of thought in which you enjoy making fun of all those other people who don’t see things as clearly as you do. We have to guard carefully against it.” - Carl Sagan, 1987 CSICOP meeting
Hmm. I think I’m going to make that my sig line. It would be nice if more people on this board thought like this.
And would moderators be allowed to moderate threads they participated in as posters?
I’d imagine december ( remembered by a few old timers ) might qualify for some in a backhanded sort of way. I found him to be an utter fucking PIA - his method of debate made my teeth itch. But…he mostly stayed within the letter of the law, such as it was. I no longer even recall the exact circumstances of his banning, but I recall disagreeing with it. At the time I thought he got bounced on a technicality, I suspect more than a little bit because he was a massive source of second-hand disruption with the ire and pit threads he generated.
Again he got on my last nerve and contributed nothing but bullshit, but he mostly toed the line. I’m pretty sure I once compared his banning to collounsbury, who I did like and actually contributed a great deal to this board - yet I thought his banning was completely fair ( and of course coll was no economic liberal himself, rather disdained them, but he tended to be lumped in with them because he was not a ME hawk at a time when most conservatives tended to be ).
All that said I don’t think any moderator bias here is particularly overt. Liberals might get more rope because fewer folks complain about them and they get glossed over more. But you do have to start edging near the line to get a warning in the first place.
I would assume that happens now, no?
Then I don’t see a reason for them to pretend to be someone else just to have the same rights as any other poster.
A lot of the time around here, it’s not even as cut and dried as the Sagan quotes you used would indicate. It’s often differences of opinion on very gray issues, but a lot of those gray issues are liberal sacred cows, so the amount of scorn and ridicule heaped on people who think differently is pretty amazing.
Hell, one of the main reasons I stick around on here is because it’s absolutely not an echo chamber for myself. My relatives and a lot of my friends slant strongly conservative, with a few going out into nutty Tea Party territory. My co-workers are harder to gauge, but the more vocal ones are at either extreme.
So I read the discussions on here hoping to see how the other side sees things. I don’t like the way that any discussion participant who doesn’t toe the line doesn’t get much respect though.
Same here. My friends are mostly fiscal conservatives and socially moderate/liberal. My cousin is one of those FB posters who finds the looniest stuff from The Blaze, Brietbart, Limbaugh and some stuff that is way out there. My FIL is worse, somewhere to the right of Pat Buchanan. Fox News is on from dawn til dusk. I also have a couple friends who basically think Obama is the second coming and every word from his mouth is another pearl. I do have a co-worker who is just slightly to the left of me fiscally so our debates are very friendly, really on matters of policy. He ribs me, claims that I love Hannity, I tell him that I know he has the hots for Ed Schultz.
This board is fun because of the variety of posters. Foreign and domestic, gay, straight or other, a few religious and a surprising number of atheists, I love them all. I just can’t understand the hate and vitriol on both sides.