51 replies to this topic

[ScottS]

Speaking of weeping, after Weave split, wasn't a new rule (or a new interpretation of an old rule) announced that prohibited insulting discussions of religions? I don't say this to suggest that Tankard's posts should be censored---I don't---but I'm just thinking about whether a double standard has evolved whereby Islam is fair game for hostile discussion and insults whereas the same kind of talk about other religions is prohibited "by law," so to speak. Even if you think that Islam is a worse religion than others, that's no reason to think that the board should have different rules for it than for, say, Christianity.

Hostile discussion was never prohibited. If stain or anyone else wants to argue that Christianity is full of crap, go for it. What is prohibited is naked bashing and implications of stupidity on the part of believers, without any intent to discuss the issue.And yes, there is a certain double standard, as there are active users here that are Christian and none (to my knowledge) that are Muslim. The "no religion bashing" rule is an extension of the "no personal attacks" rule, and thus the standards are a little different when there is no one here to be offended. That's not to say that anything goes.

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

Hostile discussion was never prohibited. If stain or anyone else wants to argue that Christianity is full of crap, go for it. What is prohibited is naked bashing and implications of stupidity on the part of believers, without any intent to discuss the issue.And yes, there is a certain double standard, as there are active users here that are Christian and none (to my knowledge) that are Muslim. The "no religion bashing" rule is an extension of the "no personal attacks" rule, and thus the standards are a little different when there is no one here to be offended. That's not to say that anything goes.

I'm starting my own strain of islam that allows 'rinkin.

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

Speaking of weeping, after Weave split, wasn't a new rule (or a new interpretation of an old rule) announced that prohibited insulting discussions of religions? I don't say this to suggest that Tankard's posts should be censored---I don't---but I'm just thinking about whether a double standard has evolved whereby Islam is fair game for hostile discussion and insults whereas the same kind of talk about other religions is prohibited "by law," so to speak. Even if you think that Islam is a worse religion than others, that's no reason to think that the board should have different rules for it than for, say, Christianity.

I missed it when he split (or I forgot). He at least added to the beer forum which is more than I can say for a lot people that probably had something to do with his weep.

[LibraAle]

I missed it when he split (or I forgot). He at least added to the beer forum which is more than I can say for a lot people that probably had something to do with his weep.

I think that slaps at people for not brewing or not posting in the brewing forum probably belong in the PH, if there is a point to them at all.

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

I think that slaps at people for not brewing or not posting in the brewing forum probably belong in the PH, if there is a point to them at all.

the point would be that this place is a supposed to mainly be about making and discussing beer/wine/mead. If it's not that than at least those areas should be given the greatest importance. when it gets to the point that someone who is contributing to the actual goal of a forum leaves due to secondary areas of the forum (the PH) I think it's not good.

[CaptRon]

the point would be that this place is a supposed to mainly be about making and discussing beer/wine/mead. If it's not that than at least those areas should be given the greatest importance. when it gets to the point that someone who is contributing to the actual goal of a forum leaves due to secondary areas of the forum (the PH) I think it's not good.

Yeah, but on the flip side he could have just avoided the PH and kept in with the beer forum.

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

Yeah, but on the flip side he could have just avoided the PH and kept in with the beer forum.

If the PH was really that seperate it would just be teh lifeboat. Since it's not I think it's fair to say that conduct in the PH reflects on the forum as a whole.

[George]

the point would be that this place is a supposed to mainly be about making and discussing beer/wine/mead. If it's not that than at least those areas should be given the greatest importance. when it gets to the point that someone who is contributing to the actual goal of a forum leaves due to secondary areas of the forum (the PH) I think it's not good.

I was not there/here back then; but, from what I have read and heard that is pretty much what Jess said.

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

I was not there/here back then; but, from what I have read and heard that is pretty much what Jess said.

maybe but I'm not suggesting starting lists, kicking members out, massive thread deletion, etc.

[ScottS]

maybe but I'm not suggesting starting lists, kicking members out, massive thread deletion, etc.

We're not?*grumble grumble**tears up list*

[MtnBrewer]

I was not there/here back then; but, from what I have read and heard that is pretty much what Jess said.

Also worth pointing out again is that when all that happened, the mods pretty much agreed with him strategically. Where we differed were in the tactics. The thing that made all the mods quit was Jess taking unilateral action to completely overhaul the board one day without any buy-in from the mods.

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

Also worth pointing out again is that when all that happened, the mods pretty much agreed with him strategically. Where we differed were in the tactics. The thing that made all the mods quit was Jess taking unilateral action to completely overhaul the board one day without any buy-in from the mods.

I'd say that we are discussing it in the open and the "we" even includes the entire forum is a good sign.

[MtnBrewer]

I'm starting to think the way to go is to confine Tankard to his own forum. We could call it "Enter at Your Own Risk".

[weave]

I think I need to clarify my reasoning for becoming inactive. While stain, basser, et al's frequent bashing of Christianity did factor in, it wasn't really about the substance and frequency of the garbage they were posting as much as it was about the general community here's implicit accepting and empowering of it. Frankly, I came to the decision that a community that was willing to accept or ignore that sort of hatred and intolerance of something I believe in is a community I don't want to participate in. It had nothing to do with avoiding certain threads or staying out of the PH. It had everything to do with me deciding to not participate in, assist, or collect information from a group of people that was willing to sit idly by and allow this sort of crap to get said without being challenged.I find it ironic and rather disappointing that LibraAle is complaining here(for lack of a better word) about the substance of Tankards postings yet to the best of my knowledge he never once called stain or basser out for intolerant commentary. LibraAle, I'm not intending to call you out specifically, judging by the number of pages I see in Tankards topics I'm willing to put good money on it that you have plenty of company. And I bet I can predict who those people are, and how infrequently they came to the defense of my belief system.Anyway.... for what it's worth. I'm not gonna debate it here. Don't plan on spending the time here quite frankly. Just thought my perspective might help here.

Edited by weave, 02 September 2010 - 06:00 AM.

[MtnBrewer]

weave, I do respect and appreciate your views. Thanks for sharing them with us. However, I keep falling back to the ignore function. If you know that a member's posts are going to make you angry simply ignore them. I know it isn't perfect but it seems like it's better than nothing. I took advantage of it before I became a mod on the green board. I suppose by choosing to not spend time here, that's what you're doing on a larger scale.

[weave]

weave, I do respect and appreciate your views. Thanks for sharing them with us. However, I keep falling back to the ignore function. If you know that a member's posts are going to make you angry simply ignore them. I know it isn't perfect but it seems like it's better than nothing. I took advantage of it before I became a mod on the green board. I suppose by choosing to not spend time here, that's what you're doing on a larger scale.

I repeat;

it wasn't really about the substance and frequency of the garbage they were posting as much as it was about the general community here's implicit accepting and empowering of it. Frankly, I came to the decision that a community that was willing to accept or ignore that sort of hatred and intolerance of something I believe in is a community I don't want to participate in.

Edited by weave, 02 September 2010 - 07:34 AM.

[MtnBrewer]

Fair enough. No need to get douchey with me.

[weave]

Fair enough. No need to get douchey with me.

Sorry.

[MtnBrewer]

It really has zero to do with whether I like it or not.