Deterioration of the religion subforum

[S.A.M.]

I just started a thread entitled "My friend turned atheist..." intimated that the friend was a liar and a psychopath and needed therapy.

The thread lasted all of one second <hands up all those who saw it>

But start a similar thread on theists and you'll have pages and pages of atheists making similar if not worse statements

The religion subforum has become a theist bashing forum. We need better representation for the protection of theists from the biased moderation.

 

[DiamondHearts]

I just started a thread entitled "My friend turned atheist..." intimated that the friend was a liar and a psychopath and needed therapy.

The thread lasted all of one second <hands up all those who saw it>

But start a similar thread on theists and you'll have pages and pages of atheists making similar if not worse statements

The religion subforum has become a theist bashing forum. We need better representation for the protection of theists from the biased moderation.

That's the way the moderators want it. You can solely blame Skinwalker's moderation for this. The other moderators seem content with the current situation.

 

[Stryder]

religion subforum has become a theist bashing forum. We need better representation for the protection of theists from the biased moderation.

I wouldn't expect any less on a Science forum. While you might try to get people to kowtow to liberalist reasoning that everybody has equal rights to a Religion, I should be known that Science will never see eye to eye with Religion because Religion is just belief and fantasy.

The Religion forums on this site weren't here to spread any religions words, in fact their hayday (Tony1 etc) was pretty much a number of Theists trying to get people to join their cult and the responses from those that really did want them to see that their view of the world is skewed. (It has little to do with any singular religion and the rhetoric was existent to prior 9/11 so you can't suggest it's just down to your minority)

In the long run having a Religion forum is a mistake if you think it's just for preaching or blind belief. I guess the forum was originally an attempt to educate people both from being blind cultists and from being completely devoid of reasoning to why such cults exist.

Incidentally you'll find most people you "tar" as Atheist are in fact Anarchists, They see a Religion as having a dictatorate form of hierarchy imposed on an uneducated number of poverty stricken people, The right to a persons own choice is deferred if there family dictates who they should worship and when.

 

[Ophiolite]

It should be known that Science will never see eye to eye with Religion because Religion is just belief and fantasy.

This is an opinion expressed as a fact. As such it appears to be in violation of the sub-forum guidlines, namely:

D. Continued preaching and proselytizing would be, thus, considered evangelizing. Evangelizing in a science forum will not be tolerated.

Emotive and unsubstantiated remarks of the kind highlighted above are nothing more than atheistic envangelising. I believe this is the sort of thing SAM is refering to.

If the administration of the forum wish to promote atheism and pretend that this is consistent with scientific objectivity they are clearly free to do so. It would be nice if they were to declare this openly rather than patronisingly claiming to hold the objective high ground.

I speak as a committed agnostic, with almost zero belief in the supernatural claims of orthodox religions, not as a frustrated theist.

 

[S.A.M.]

If the administration of the forum wish to promote atheism and pretend that this is consistent with scientific objectivity they are clearly free to do so. It would be nice if they were to declare this openly rather than patronisingly claiming to hold the objective high ground.
.

Thats my point. If they want to run an agony aunt column for atheists rather than a science forum, they should make that clear in their TOC.

Skinwalker has sent me this warning a half hour after I started this thread in Site Feedback [which is a half hour after he deleted the thread in the religion forum entitled: My friend turned atheist...]

Dear S.A.M.,

You have received a warning at SciForums.com.

Reason:
-------
Trolling / Meaningless Post Content

This is clearly trolling and part of the an on-going problem within this subforum where theists think they can just preach and bash rationalists and science. The next infraction in this subforum will result in a temporary suspension of your account.
-------

Original Post:
[post]2305534[/post]

is he a lying psychopath who needs therapy? How can his children be protected from his raving babblings?

What should I dooooooo? I can't cope with this!

/rational discussion or what passes for it in the religion forum

Warnings serve as a reminder to you of the forum's rules, which you are expected to understand and follow.

All the best,
SciForums.com

Note that all I said in this thread is being said about theists in the religion forum and is considered rational discussion.

 

[glaucon]

I agree with the thread title; the Religion subforum has indeed deteriorated.

Alas, I agree with this for the exact opposite reasoning that SAM has indicated.

If anything, it's the theists who are responsible for its deterioration. The vast majority of those on the theist 'side' do little but react in a predictably irrational fashion to the criticisms of those on the non-theistic 'camp'. Thus, very little discussion actually ever occurs; it's nothing more than tit-for tat bickering.

Last time I checked, this was SciForums, not FairyForums. It should be well understood therefore, that an actual discourse, even on religious subjects, will necessarily include analyses involving logic and empirical verification. Unsubstantiated claims and 'defenses' (sic) involving 'intuitions', 'transcendence' and other of such ilk are literally meaningless: off to the Pseudoscience or Parapsychology subforum for you.
Everyone is free to believe what they will, but to visit this site and think that your rationally suspect beliefs will remain unchallenged is just stupid.

For myself, I would call for this 'solution':

All non-theists simply give up trying to show the deluded ones the error of their ways, and discontinue posting in the Religion subforum.

I suspect that this would result in two things:
First, the theistic camp would enjoy not being harangued by the 'atheists', and could get down to babbling at each other freely.
Second, after about 6 weeks or so (most likely less...) the Religion subforum would become a ghost town.


Last note: Personally, I have to applaud SkinWalker and James. I would maintain that the Religion subforum is arguably the most difficult one to moderate.
Cheers to you both.

 

[Carcano]

The only honest way of keeping the Religion forum is to come right out and rename it...

Religion...No Theism Allowed!

 

[S.A.M.]

I agree with the thread title; the Religion subforum has indeed deteriorated.

Alas, I agree with this for the exact opposite reasoning that SAM has indicated.

If anything, it's the theists who are responsible for its deterioration. The vast majority of those on the theist 'side' do little but react in a predictably irrational fashion to the criticisms of those on the non-theistic 'camp'. Thus, very little discussion actually ever occurs; it's nothing more than tit-for tat bickering.

Last time I checked, this was SciForums, not FairyForums. It should be well understood therefore, that an actual discourse, even on religious subjects, will necessarily include analyses involving logic and empirical verification. Unsubstantiated claims and 'defenses' (sic) involving 'intuitions', 'transcendence' and other of such ilk are literally meaningless: off to the Pseudoscience or Parapsychology subforum for you.
Everyone is free to believe what they will, but to visit this site and think that your rationally suspect beliefs will remain unchallenged is just stupid.

For myself, I would call for this 'solution':

All non-theists simply give up trying to show the deluded ones the error of their ways, and discontinue posting in the Religion subforum.

I suspect that this would result in two things:
First, the theistic camp would enjoy not being harangued by the 'atheists', and could get down to babbling at each other freely.
Second, after about 6 weeks or so (most likely less...) the Religion subforum would become a ghost town.


Last note: Personally, I have to applaud SkinWalker and James. I would maintain that the Religion subforum is arguably the most difficult one to moderate.
Cheers to you both.

What do you think of this glaucon?

Dear S.A.M.,

You have received a warning at SciForums.com.

Reason:
-------
Off-Topic Posting


-------

Original Post:
[post]2305968[/post]

Wow, heavy suckage. Let me know if that was also too technical for you.

reported.

Warnings serve as a reminder to you of the forum's rules, which you are expected to understand and follow.

All the best,
SciForums.com

 

[glaucon]

What do you think of this glaucon?

I think that it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
So swarm tossed some abuse at you. You reported it, end of story. regardless, it has no bearing whatsoever on the discussion at hand (or, for that matter, the discussion at hand in the respective thread).

The only honest way of keeping the Religion forum is to come right out and rename it...

Religion...No Theism Allowed!

Feel free to make a comment with some content at any time.

 

[S.A.M.]

I think that it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
So swarm tossed some abuse at you. You reported it, end of story. regardless, it has no bearing whatsoever on the discussion at hand (or, for that matter, the discussion at hand in the respective thread).
.

No what do you think of a moderator warning me on off topic posting when I reported an obvious flaming post?

 

[James R]

SAM:

I just started a thread entitled "My friend turned atheist..." intimated that the friend was a liar and a psychopath and needed therapy.

In other words, you were trolling. You threw out a line in the hopes that angry atheists would bite.

But start a similar thread on theists and you'll have pages and pages of atheists making similar if not worse statements

But nobody does that, do they?

The religion subforum has become a theist bashing forum. We need better representation for the protection of theists from the biased moderation.

I find it extremely interesting that you of all people are complaining about the deterioration of the Religion forum, when it seems to me that you have been the person primarily behind its deterioration.

Virtually every thread you start there has the aim of bashing atheists. You're obsessed, and apparently incapable of having a reasonable discussion about religion.

[Cue the complaint that other people are more unreasonable than you, so that makes your behaviour admirable. *yawn*]

 

[S.A.M.]

All my threads have been mirror images of discussions about theists. Are you claiming that bashing theists is acceptable while bashing atheists is not?

I did not realise that by questioning the beliefs of atheists I was contributing to the deterioration of the forum.

I would also like some clarification on the rules of the forum where reporting a post is now off topic and leads to a warning.

 

[James R]

All my threads have been mirror images of discussions about theists. Are you claiming that bashing theists is acceptable while bashing atheists is not?

Yes, that's what I'm claiming, SAM. Of course it is.

Really, apply just a little intelligence. You do have some, I know.

I did not realise that by questioning the beliefs of atheists I was contributing to the deterioration of the forum.

If that was what all you were doing there would be no problem, SAM. But you know and I know that most of your time in Religion is spent trolling. You repeat yourself incessantly. You wilfully misrepresent the beliefs of atheists. You consistently imply that atheists are stupid and/or evil. You show no desire to learn what atheists really think about things, because you're too comfortable in your own set of prejudices.

I would also like some clarification on the rules of the forum where reporting a post is now off topic and leads to a warning.

Reporting a post is no problem. Reporting posts every 2 and a half minutes can become a drain on moderators' time and effort. It's akin to vexatious litigation.

Why is it, SAM, that I see so many reports that are either about you or by you? Why do I need to devote so much time to your posts and complaints? Something is out of kilter.

 

[S.A.M.]

Yes, that's what I'm claiming, SAM. Of course it is.

Really, apply just a little intelligence. You do have some, I know.

Then please point out where I have made an irrational argument in the religion forum.

If that was what all you were doing there would be no problem, SAM. But you know and I know that most of your time in Religion is spent trolling. You repeat yourself incessantly. You wilfully misrepresent the beliefs of atheists. You consistently imply that atheists are stupid and/or evil. You show no desire to learn what atheists really think about things, because you're too comfortable in your own set of prejudices.

Mirror images of discussions about theists.

Reporting a post is no problem. Reporting posts every 2 and a half minutes can become a drain on moderators' time and effort. It's akin to vexatious litigation.

Please tell me what is the preferred time limit for reporting posts and how many posts I can report when I see forum rules being broken. Also if warnings are issued based on who is reporting [theist/atheist] and which forum rules being broken is considered a valid reason for reporting which is not a "drain on moderators time and effort"

Why is it, SAM, that I see so many reports that are either about you or by you? Why do I need to devote so much time to your posts and complaints? Something is out of kilter.

Can you give me some statistics here? How many reports by me in the last month? How many about me?

Which ones were valid? What actions were taken?

I don't have enough information to reach any informed conclusion merely based on your opinion. But I am willing to examine the reasons for the reporting by and about me and the actions taken for validity.

 

[glaucon]

No what do you think of a moderator warning me on off topic posting when I reported an obvious flaming post?

I t hink that the warning you received was warranted.
Clearly, offtopic posts are a violation.

 

[S.A.M.]

I t hink that the warning you received was warranted.

Of course you do.

Clearly, offtopic posts are a violation.

Clearly

 

[glaucon]

Of course you do.

I fail to see why you bothered to ask.
You violate a rule, you shouldn't be surprised when you receive a warning.

 

[S.A.M.]

You larn sumthink everyday. Today I larned that posting that I have reported a post in the thread is off topic. Hence forth I shall open a thread in About the members to keep a tally of my reported posts.

 

[glaucon]

You larn sumthink everyday. Today I larned that posting that I have reported a post in the thread is off topic. Hence forth I shall open a thread in About the members to keep a tally of my reported posts.

Given your pedantic proclivities, I think this would be quite apt of you.

 

[S.A.M.]

Its not pedantic, just common sense. I like to know which posts I have reported, so as not to report any twice or be confused about which post has not [yet] been reported.