Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on HO?

[telephone89]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

I personally love talking about religion. I have a deep knowledge of Christianity and Islam and love talking to people about them (both the good and bad). I think it would be great if we could talk more on here, but I don't think folks can handle it. If that previous thread had SO many snowflakes upset, imagine how bad it'll get when people are actually DISCUSSING religion? Not simply stating that they ARE a certain religion? It will be out of control. I wonder if admin has a certain number of 'reports' they meet before closing a thread? Sometimes they will just delete very terrible replies and leave the rest of the thread going. But if they have a limit they HAVE to close a thread on (say 100 reports on a thread), would they just ignore these if they are 'snowflake reports'?

I dunno, I wish we could follow this philosophy. But it doesn't seem to apply on PS.

 

[AGBF]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

What has happend to us?
How did we get this way?

Do you really want to know or is the question rhetorical? If you really want to know, read Civilization and Its Discontents by Sigmund Freud. In a nutshell, he says that each individual has to give up some of his natural desires so that he can exist in a civilization. It is painful to the individual, but also necessary for the individual. Freud said it better.

 

[Matata]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

I wouldn't want to see religion discussed as a primary topic for all the reasons already stated. However, if it comes up in contexts similar to AGBF's now locked thread, and as it has in many other threads as ancillary to a discussion (which is often because so many aspects of culture and behavior are based on religious tenets), then fine.

What I vehemently oppose is the closing of threads because of their offensive nature to someone. Instead of putting the alleged offender in timeout, perhaps the offended should be put in timeout. Or better yet, just let the discussions run their course. Or establish a "Snowflake Free Zone" accessible only to PS members where controversial subjects can be discussed with the clear understanding that if you venture into that area and become offended by something, it's your choice and you have to bear the consequences or just stay out of that area.

 

[AGBF]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

I wouldn't want to see religion discussed as a primary topic for all the reasons already stated. However, if it comes up in contexts similar to AGBF's now locked thread, and as it has in many other threads as ancillary to a discussion (which is often because so many aspects of culture and behavior are based on religious tenets), then fine.

What I vehemently oppose is the closing of threads because of their offensive nature to someone. Instead of putting the alleged offender in timeout, perhaps the offended should be put in timeout. Or better yet, just let the discussions run their course. Or establish a "Snowflake Free Zone" accessible only to PS members where controversial subjects can be discussed with the clear understanding that if you venture into that area and become offended by something, it's your choice and you have to bear the consequences or just stay out of that area.

We had that, Matata (but it was only for politics, not religion). Then it was closed and incorporated into Hangout.

 

[MollyMalone]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

* * * But you've got me to wondering: is there a forum out there that provides space for thoughtful and (mostly*) respectful discussions of religion and the non- pr anti-religious beliefs, and how those beliefs impact individuals and society?
* mostly because I am somewhat of a realist!

I was going to suggest the forums on BeliefNet.com where it seemed to me that people (well, most of them) who posted there were interested in earnest, civil, respectful dialogue... not just looking to hear themselves talk, not striving to affirm the validity of their beliefs -- or non-beliefs (i.e., "see how right and right-minded I and others like me are") and/or convince others of their (the others') errancy.

But I just went to retrieve the URL for the forums Index page & now see (it's been awhile since I've visited the site) that those discussions are now being conducted via Facebook. I don't "do" Facebook -- or maybe I should say I don't believe in Facebook -- but here's the info for anyone who might be interested:
http://community.beliefnet.com/beliefnet-message.html

 

[iluvshinythings]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

I didn't know the rule and made a comment regarding religion once on PS. It resulted in another discussion. To my knowledge, no one was offended and I'm relieved. I think the topic of beliefs and spirituality are very interesting. From my experiences on other forums, religion is one of those topics that most people can't discuss respectfully. I think PSers in general are more polite, respectful and intelligent than most forums and I'd hate for that to change. I'm not easily offended but I do get offended when I see someone being rude. So for those reasons, I think PS is a better place without discussing religion.

 

[momhappy]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

I abhor those university safe houses where delicate special snowflakes don't have to hear/see anything except for baskets of fluffy kittens.

It sounds like many want HO to be one of these insulated safe houses.

People vary ... but we just can't take it.
Other people being different shouldn't knock us off our bicycles, but it does.
Why do we need everyone to be just like us?

... and I'm just just pointing a finger; I'm guilty too.

What has happend to us?
How did we get this way?[/quote]

I don't think that we got this way - I think we've always been this way, it's human nature. I think that maybe we have gotten more sensitive about some things, but given the increasing population, I'm not surprised.

 

[VRBeauty]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

* * * But you've got me to wondering: is there a forum out there that provides space for thoughtful and (mostly*) respectful discussions of religion and the non- pr anti-religious beliefs, and how those beliefs impact individuals and society?
* mostly because I am somewhat of a realist!

I was going to suggest the forums on BeliefNet.com where it seemed to me that people (well, most of them) who posted there were interested in earnest, civil, respectful dialogue... not just looking to hear themselves talk, not striving to affirm the validity of their beliefs -- or non-beliefs (i.e., "see how right and right-minded I and others like me are") and/or convince others of their (the others') errancy.

But I just went to retrieve the URL for the forums Index page & now see (it's been awhile since I've visited the site) that those discussions are now being conducted via Facebook. I don't "do" Facebook -- or maybe I should say I don't believe in Facebook -- but here's the info for anyone who might be interested:
http://community.beliefnet.com/beliefnet-message.html

Thanks Molly - I'll have to check that out.

And I find it ironic that we did seem to be having an honest and respectful discussion on the question you raised Kenny, only to find you calling who disagreed with you names. So no, I don't think PS is the place for free-ranging discussions on religion. If as Matata said it comes up in the course of another topic, that's a different matter.

 

[kenny]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

VR, I'm not consistent and far from perfect.

Kenny being a butthead is not in dispute.
I've been banned more than any other regular.
Compared to years ago I do try to keep my butthead from stinking too much, so the process works.

With my defects firmly established perhaps now we can return to the topic Ella introduced last night?
Perhaps not.

 

[packrat]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

I know it's hard to "read" posts and to accurately gauge the tone of a post. Even in every day life sometimes it's hard to read people, to accurately gauge the tone of voice. What do we do then? Sometimes I feel like people want to be upset, want to be offended, want to control all the situations they can, purposely. There's not really anything on here that is required. Not required to read every thread, every post, not required to post a certain amount. It's an at will kinda thing. If you don't want to participate, then...you...well, I guess you just..don't? Kinda like in real life. If I walked into a room and they were discussing something that bothered me, upset me, offended me, made me mad, made me want to cry..we have the choice to listen, to listen and participate, or walk away. I do at times find that the easily offended are the reason why we are the way we are now. Because we allow it. There is no more learning to deal w/it. Even if we're all born this way, it's all a part of being human...sometimes we have to learn to adapt, learn to cope, learn to get along with, things we don't agree with..and if we don't have to participate, then there's not really anything to adapt to, cope with, get along with, and that allows those who want to participate, the option to do so w/out being controlled by those who wish it to not be. At some point we're going to limit ourselves too far and we'll go back to a society time where it was inappropriate to discuss *anything*..how dare a woman try to discuss something w/a *man*? How dare you, who only have a GED dare discuss something w/me, as *I* have my masters. You are a different color, you may not discuss anything w/me. We're turning ourselves into lessers and betters w/our specialness.

 

[ruby59]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

Quote
"I would be willing to speak to Andrey about trying out allowing discussion of religion, but if we did that and there were insulting or snotty posts about someone's points of view or religion, there would also be a lot more time outs. If that is something y'all would like to try, I can speak with him.

It would be a zero tolerance policy. You make a snarky or rude post to someone, and you get a time out, probably one of a month or more. Our judgement call on what constitutes rude. If history is any indicator, there would be many, many time outs and offended people. Which is why we decided it was not worth it before."
End of Quote.
___________________________________________

This is pretty much why after 10 years I have stopped posting here. Since very few here can determine why AGBF's thread was closed, how are we going to be able to determine what will and will not be allowed on a religion thread. Snarky, rude - by what definition. And I did not realize other posters were notifying the mods so much.

Safe rooms, heavy moderation, posters tattling on one another - for me that is not a definition of a thriving message board.

If I have to second guess everything I might post, then it is not really what I believe. So what is the point?

 

[Matata]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

There's not really anything on here that is required. Not required to read every thread, every post, not required to post a certain amount. It's an at will kinda thing. If you don't want to participate, then...you...well, I guess you just..don't? Kinda like in real life.

Some people are like ambulance chasers, people who rubberneck at accidents, moths who can't seem to stay away from the flame, and all those cats who die of their curiosity. Just like in real life. When threads blow up I usually sit back and enjoy the show. Human nature is fairly predictable.

 

[canuk-gal]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

Pricescope is a diamond forum you know those fun sparky things we all enjoy.
People helping people is what it it is about. (while making a few bucks doing so for the owners and pay the bills for the site by adds )
The other sections were formed by user requests over the years to give people more to do here while they are hanging around talking about diamonds.

It is not a debate religion forum and imho should not be debate politics either.
They divide people, while PS is about people from all over the world coming together to talk about sparkly things.
Frankly politics in hangout is already too much for me and I find myself reading it much less often.

I understand what you are saying, and large in part, agree. Outside of PS, dedicated forums for these topics already exist for rigorous discussion; and inside PS threads become tempests without much provocation...nonpolitical and nonreligious threads!

Notwithstanding threads/forums dedicated to such topics, would be "very difficult" to moderate.

cheers--Sharon

 

[ruby59]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

The other sections were formed by user requests over the years to give people more to do here while they are hanging around talking about diamonds.

________________________________________________________

Exactly. And in the meantime if you want to keep regulars interested then you have to provide the ability for them to engage in current topics. Otherwise they go off to those other message boards and do not return.

 

[kenny]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

If the 'reasoning' is, We should not discuss religion because religion not a diamond, then Hangout should be closed.

Here is admin's description of the mission of Hangout:

 

[Ella]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

Just to clarify, this poll may take the temperature of people on PS, but it is still the owner's decision to make.

Just so everyone is aware that Kenny's poll is only for information gathering.

 

[kenny]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

Just to clarify, this poll may take the temperature of people on PS, but it is still the owner's decision to make.

Just so everyone is aware that Kenny's poll is only for information gathering.

Thanks Ella.
I totally agree, and harbored no intention of using votes to convert PS into a democracy. (especially since the votes are not going my way. )

I'm glad you clarified, and allowed this discussion thread/poll to stay up.
IMO, it's already generated lots of good thought-provoking points.

 

[dk168]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

Don't care, won't care, as I will not participate in such discussions, along with discussions on politics and race.

DK

 

[AGBF]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

The other sections were formed by user requests over the years to give people more to do here while they are hanging around talking about diamonds.

________________________________________________________

Exactly. And in the meantime if you want to keep regulars interested then you have to provide the ability for them to engage in current topics. Otherwise they go off to those other message boards and do not return.

Like Molly Malone, I do not use Facebook. Therefore, I will not be able to utilize the forum where discussions about religion take place, the one that was recommended in this thread. I tend to participate in discussion with people I "know" from talks about other topics (diamonds and gold here, dogs on another forum) just as I would talk to people I "know" in real life about topics other than the one that originally drew us together.

I, therefore, participate in a Christmas music thread both on Pricescope and on the dog forum to which I belong.

I like to discuss political issues with people here because I "know" them. (Of course I discuss political issues with other people elsewhere!)

It would be nice to be free to discuss anything here, but not at the risk of being sent away!!!

Frankly, if Hangout were not here, I'd never see Jewelry Pieces or The Gold Thread anymore. I'd only come back once in a while when the urge to buy a diamond piece hit me. Hangout keeps me a regular.

 

[kenny]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

Don't care, won't care, as I will not participate in such discussions, along with discussions on politics and race.

DK

I feel that way about the mascara threads.

 

[ruby59]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

But shouldn't Pricescope be where a person can unburden, exchange ideas, and feel relaxed without constantly looking over their shoulder for the hammer to drop?

 

[dk168]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

Don't care, won't care, as I will not participate in such discussions, along with discussions on politics and race.

DK

I feel that way about the mascara threads.

I did not participate in that one either - I have much bigger fish to fry!

DK

 

[kenny]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

But shouldn't Pricescope be where a person can unburden, exchange ideas, and feel relaxed without constantly looking over their shoulder for the hammer to drop?

Everyone has a different idea of what PS 'should' be.

Andrey's idea is the only one that rules the place.

Personally I don't look over my shoulder.
I'm not afraid people will think of me as not the ideal person.
What a stressful way to live.

Just be yourself.
I love that saying, "What others think of me is none of my business."

 

[dk168]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

But shouldn't Pricescope be where a person can unburden, exchange ideas, and feel relaxed without constantly looking over their shoulder for the hammer to drop?

Unfortunately, someone somewhere will always believe his/her views and opinions are the only ones that are right/correct, and everyone else must be wrong.

And there are those who will cry "victim" and claim to be "bullied" at a drop of a hat.

Moderation in a board such as this is inevitable and a must.

DK

 

[kenny]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

Don't care, won't care, as I will not participate in such discussions, along with discussions on politics and race.

DK

I feel that way about the mascara threads.

I did not participate in that one either - I have much bigger fish to fry!

DK

Like this thread you are participating in ... about religion?

 

[kenny]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

Unfortunately, someone somewhere will always believe his/her views and opinions are the only ones that are right/correct, and everyone else must be wrong.

Unless they accept that esoteric concept ........ People Vary.

Hence, my crusade.

 

[dk168]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

Like this thread ... about religion?

This is not a thread about religion, it is a thread about whether a certain subject matter should be discussed.

DK

 

[kenny]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

Like this thread ... about religion?

This is not a thread about religion, it is a thread about whether a certain subject matter should be discussed.

DK

That certain subject matter is ... religion.

Welcome to the fish fry!

 

[ruby59]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

Personally I don't look over my shoulder.
I'm not afraid people will think of me as not the ideal person.
What a stressful way to live.

___________________________________

It is not other posters, but the adminstration, that worries me.

I have been here 10 years. Until the change I made like 10 posts. But now I am starting to feel that way again.

 

[kenny]

Re: Would you like to try allowing discussion of religion on

Personally I don't look over my shoulder.
I'm not afraid people will think of me as not the ideal person.
What a stressful way to live.

___________________________________

It is not other posters, but the adminstration, that worries me.

I have been here 10 years. Until the change I made like 10 posts. But now I am starting to feel that way again.

(I'm not sure what you did Ruby, but those first three sentences (which I've painted red) are a quote of me.)

What change? When Andrey took over?
Andrey is a zillion times more tolerant/lenient than the previous owner.
The previous owner really creeped me out!
Even Kenny was looking over his shoulder for the KGB thugs in fast pursuit in a Volga.

Frankly I sense PS is relaxing the iron fist compared to the recent and the distant past.
I applaud Ella's willingness to give us a chance ... IF we behave.

I intend to behave.
I will not attack people, but I will challenge ideas.
If someone interprets idea-challenging as a personal attack they need to grow some balls or ovaries so they can venture out of their 'Special Snowflake Campus Safe House'.