A New Standard of Interaction on TheologyOnline

[Buzzword]

What you are failing to understand is that those words are allowed here, if there is just cause for them. That is why people don't get a warning, not because there is no moderation.

Then who gets to decide what "just cause" is?

Someone who agrees with the insulter?

Someone who disagrees with the insultee?

If an atheist calls a christian a moron, is that atheist automatically getting an infraction?

If a christian calls an atheist a moron, is that christian automatically lauded?


There is NEVER "just cause" for hurling insults.
If you start insulting the opposition, you are claiming DEFEAT because you obviously have no counter to their argument.

 

[Rusha]

There is NEVER "just cause" for hurling insults. If you start insulting the opposition, you are claiming DEFEAT because you obviously have no counter to their argument.

:BRAVO:

 

[Lighthouse]

Then who gets to decide what "just cause" is?

Someone who agrees with the insulter?

Someone who disagrees with the insultee?

If an atheist calls a christian a moron, is that atheist automatically getting an infraction?

If a christian calls an atheist a moron, is that christian automatically lauded?


There is NEVER "just cause" for hurling insults.
If you start insulting the opposition, you are claiming DEFEAT because you obviously have no counter to their argument.

If you don't have a counter to their argument, then there is no cause to call them a moron. If you know why they are wrong, and recognize that their argument is based on ignorance, then you have cause. And if you call someone a moron you should be able to show how they are a moron. If you are unable or unwilling to do so then you need to keep your insults to yourself.

And if a Christian is being an idiot, and an atheist recognizes that then they have just cause to call them on it.

Of course, the ones who decide whether the name calling is worthy of an infraction are the staff.

If you see an insult that you feel is uncalled for, search it out. Ask the person who threw it out there to explain themselves, if they have not yet done so. Then, if they refuse, report them.

And if one insults another simply because they disagree, then they are in the wrong.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Then who gets to decide what "just cause" is?

Someone who agrees with the insulter?

Someone who disagrees with the insultee?

If an atheist calls a christian a moron, is that atheist automatically getting an infraction?

If a christian calls an atheist a moron, is that christian automatically lauded?


There is NEVER "just cause" for hurling insults.
If you start insulting the opposition, you are claiming DEFEAT because you obviously have no counter to their argument.

TOL is biased. It always has been and always will be a right-wing Christian website. Therefore, calling a pedophile a pervert is acceptable while a pervert doesn't have the right to call a Christian a pervert.

Not all world-views are equally valid.

If people do not like TOL's bias they probably shouldn't participate here on TOL.

The only reason for the change in interaction standard is because many folks were/are unnecessarily being harsh ie., "without cause".

 

[genuineoriginal]

There is NEVER "just cause" for hurling insults.
If you start insulting the opposition, you are claiming DEFEAT because you obviously have no counter to their argument.

:duh: People who use absolutes like NEVER are morons.

 

[The Graphite]

There is NEVER "just cause" for hurling insults.
If you start insulting the opposition, you are claiming DEFEAT because you obviously have no counter to their argument.

You should tell Jesus that when you see Him. That would be news to Him.

:duh: People who use absolutes like NEVER are morons.

:rotfl:

 

[Stripe]

It's about time, IMO.

With every other (total of five) message boards I'm on, calling someone a "moron," "idiot," "godless scum," etc. gets you at LEAST a hardcore warning, then a 3-day ban, so on and so on.

What's the point of having moderators if the discussions aren't going to be MODERATED?

Member of the fagsRus and homoland forums, are you?

My experience with other forums (no, not those two) is that as long as you are abusing someone with an unpopular opinion there is a lot more leeway. The difference out there being is that they claim, as you say, that such abuse is wrong. Non-TOL moderation is generally run by a bunch of hypocritical morons. :chuckle:


...


:noid:

 

[Lion]

Buzzword said;

There is NEVER "just cause" for hurling insults.
If you start insulting the opposition, you are claiming DEFEAT because you obviously have no counter to their argument.

Really? Never? Ever?

Luke 13:32
And He said to them, “Go, tell that fox, ‘Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.’

Matthew 15:7
Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying:

Matthew 23:17
Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that sanctifies the gold?

John 8:44
You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do.

Matthew 16:23
But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men.”

Perhaps you have slightly... just a teeny-weeny bit... misspoken. After all…er…ulp…excuse me…I think… oh no…urg…:vomit:
…sorry…this cordial stuff might take a little getting used to.

 

[Stripe]

Perhaps you have slightly... just a teeny-weeny bit... misspoken. After all…er…ulp…excuse me…I think… oh no…urg…:vomit:
…sorry…this cordial stuff might take a little getting used to.

He would have to be stupid or blind to make such a statement. Is that what you were going to say?



...



:noid:

 

[freelight]

upgrading the character of dialogue...............

upgrading the character of dialogue...............

The only reason for the change in interaction standard is because many folks were/are unnecessarily being harsh ie., "without cause".

Ah,...looks like many of our 'reports' and 'rebukes' for rudeness and name-calling have tipped the scales - integrity, mutual respect, courtesy and civility are 'proper' in their own respect, and surely earn greater honors than anything less. Decency has its place, if anything speaking of the character of a person, let alone his doctrinal preferences or beliefs. The former is actually more important, one's quality of being, and how they treat others....amid the sharing of various perspectives, beliefs and ideas.

------

I love the truthsmack gages (having a subtle comical value). Good to know 'balanced debate' and 'agreeing to disagree' are just around the corner. - in any case,...its a sign of 'progress'. A wonderful challenge and opportunity for some of the more 'brash' members to polish up on their manners. Thanks for innovating. :thumb:





pj​

 

[Lighthouse]

Buzzword said;

Really? Never? Ever?

Perhaps you have slightly... just a teeny-weeny bit... misspoken. After all…er…ulp…excuse me…I think… oh no…urg…:vomit:
…sorry…this cordial stuff might take a little getting used to.

It's not January 1^st yet, Lion. You're still free to not be cordial for a few weeks.

 

[Lon]

Ah, the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law folk all chiming in.

I think it befitting saints to honor saints regardless of our disagreements and this is a good TOL move I have prayed about and believe necessary.

Jesus did call Pharisees by names (not just names). Did He love them? I think you have to answer 'yes.' He who calls us to love our enemies and do good to them must have that value from within His own nature or it would not be a command. If you call someone a hypocrite 1) be accurate 2) be appropriate 3) pray for them, it's terrible to be a hypocrite. I've been one on occasion. We hypocrites need love too, even in needed rebuke. The call here is to not be 'needlessly' abusive. As the verse states, a harsh rebuke is better than love unseen. Open rebuke should be the most loving thing at the time it is given, both for the body present and for the need of the one for correction.

Knight, I applaud your candor AND this movement of His graces and mercies.

 

[Bob Enyart]

I'll comply with the new Smack Gage target demeanor...

I'll comply with the new Smack Gage target demeanor...

Knight,

I will also make an effort to comply with the new Smack Gage target demeanor!

in an effort to create a website with the purpose of smacking liberals around we have often times sunken to a level that we would prefer not to have sunken to.

...reminds me of the ACLU defending a protestors right to burn down the ACLU headquarters

Now, all that said, kmoney dissin' the Nicer than God teaching is simply, well, that's simply not nice kmoney. C'mon, stop judgin'...
...before I... er, uh...

oh yeah, that new smack gage thing...



-Bob Enyart
KGOV.com

 

[Lighthouse]

Knight,

I will also make an effort to comply with the new Smack Gage target demeanor!



...reminds me of the ACLU defending a protestors right to burn down the ACLU headquarters

Now, all that said, kmoney dissin' the Nicer than God teaching is simply, well, that's simply not nice kmoney. C'mon, stop judgin'...
...before I... er, uh...

oh yeah, that new smack gage thing...



-Bob Enyart
KGOV.com

That doesn't start until January 1^st

 

[kmoney]

Knight,

I will also make an effort to comply with the new Smack Gage target demeanor!



...reminds me of the ACLU defending a protestors right to burn down the ACLU headquarters

Now, all that said, kmoney dissin' the Nicer than God teaching is simply, well, that's simply not nice kmoney. C'mon, stop judgin'...
...before I... er, uh...

oh yeah, that new smack gage thing...



-Bob Enyart
KGOV.com

:chuckle:

That doesn't start until January 1^st

:noid:

 

[DilatedMind]

I just noticed this. How very interesting.

I'd already picked up on this site being more cordial that it was when I first joined a year ago; there certainly is a more relaxed air around the place. Hopefully this is more of a general mood shift rather than just people being told not to be too rude.

As an example, take two negative rep comments I received from Nick M, spaced more or less exactly a year apart:

2007: I mentioned in a post that a lot of my close friends were female, and I got this: Your close friends are women because you are a HOMO.
A bit random, and I'm guessing designed to be an insult.

2008: I'd made a thread about the prevalence of catastrophic flood stories around the world, and I got this: For placing 'myth' where fact goes.
Can't argue with that. Cordial, to the point, explained what his problem was, and with no insults flying anywhere. Well done that man.

I take my hat off to you, Nick M. And I hope you don't mind me using you as an example.

 

[The Reverent One]

Yes, it's true that....
Homosexuality is still a sin.
Abortion is still murder.
God is still free.
Welfare and public schools are still bad.
etc.

But that doesn't mean I can't deal with these arguments using gentleness and self control.

AMEN BROTHER!

 

[Nick M]

Calling you a homo for all your close friends being women isn't even close to harsh.

 

[JCWR]

I guess I can live with these changes. Does this mean that Door can return now?

 

[Lighthouse]

I guess I can live with these changes. Does this mean that Door can return now?

Door left of his own accord, and refuses to return. A gentler TOL is certainly not going to make him want to return.