Originally posted by Grampy BobbyCan you provide insight as to why Galveston tells robbie carrobie that I must now regret starting this this thread and yet refuses to answer me on it directly?
124 Posts... "Forum etiquette" appears to be a topic of interest within an online spirituality forum.
Originally posted by divegeesterUnclear... unless it's suggesting that the topic got trampled and nicked and the thread didn't go as planned. Just a guess.
Can you provide insight as to why Galveston tells robbie carrobie that I must now regret starting this this thread and yet refuses to answer me on it directly?
Originally posted by Nick BourbakiOne could replace the words "stalker" and "stalking" in my suggestion above with "troll" and "trolling". People using these smears in an effort to evade on-topic but inconvenient questions strikes me as poisonous forum behaviour, whether it be of the aggressive or the passive-aggressive kind.
Pressing a matter in the face of stonewalling and then being accused of being a "stalker" or trying to get a poster banned for "stalking" (for comments and questions posted in a public forum), strike me as particularly poisonous forum behaviour.
Lemon Lime and Others,
I think that I would rather be called a "viper" than "you can't read English." The Lord Jesus had a point when he called out "viper" or "hypocrite."
No matter what, Jesus loved his neighbors. When he called people titles, he did not do it out of a hard heart.
Perhaps, people on here, that call other people names, do not do it out of loving heart, but only for criticism. That is not etiquette.
If we do use titles for other people, do it out of trying to teach them or to try to get them to change into what is better rather than just criticizing. Closer to God is better. And loving is better too.
Someone Typed:
"as many insults, lies, and racist or sexist slurs as imaginable" thus far?
If someone is to use such insults, lies, racism or sexism, then how does that apply to anyone? If it is only criticism, then the person using such language is not serious about the conversation or the topic.
Those people may end up doing more harm to the value of anything that is discussed and lead people away from God. These people need to be banned from hurting the cause of Christ in this way.
If you don't believe, then just say that. If you want to use "slurs," then don't put on a message that takes people away from seeking God. And don't take away people from seeking Christ.
Originally posted by divegeesterDucking out of the debate can also be confused with having a life and just
This forum is very popular with its regular users and all of us generally seem to abide by an unwritten code of forum etiquette; a code which ranges from avoiding the use of insults (OK most of us try) to not misrepresenting another posters words or obvious meaning, to checking back to reply to respondents especially if the OP is ours.
This latter pi ...[text shortened]... e other regulars here as to whether I'm harbouring overly ambitious expectations in this matter?
not getting back here. Why assume the worse?
Kelly
Originally posted by KingOnPointWhy not, since they are seeking fantasies? I guess you are saying let us alone in our fantasy.
Someone Typed:
"as many insults, lies, and racist or sexist slurs as imaginable" thus far?
If someone is to use such insults, lies, racism or sexism, then how does that apply to anyone? If it is only criticism, then the person using such language is not serious about the conversation or the topic.
Those people may end up doing more harm to the ...[text shortened]... essage that takes people away from seeking God. And don't take away people from seeking Christ.
The only problem with that is the physical harm done to people who believe differently. Like the Taliban murders, like the cult just discovered killing a thousand people in the Central African Republic, like the right wing religious nutters killing abortion doctors, like the right wing religious nutters killing gays, like the right wing religious nutters killing people who disagree with their particular fantasy.
THAT is the problem I have with such things.
OBVIOUSLY at the lower levels of the political spectrum of religious folk, they do a lot of good locally, I never have said otherwise.
My angst is aimed at the upper levels, those who by their statements, inculcate the ability to violence, even after the upper levels vehemently deny any such thing.
They do and you know that happens all the time. Words apparently innocent seen as edicts to do violence happens every day in religious circles.
Show me the same thing happening in atheist gatherings.
You don't see atheists calling for the expulsion of theists or the death of them.
You only see that in the ultra right religious groups like the survivalists in Montana who maintain an army ready to go to war at a moments notice and invoke god doing it.
Like the taliban and other ultra right wing extremist groups, all invoking a non existent god in their attempt to justify their hatred and violence, rape and killing in this non existent god's name.
And of course your reply will be, those are not REAL christians or muslims, blah blah blah. Regardless, they are still killing in some fantasy god's name.
I would like to add one item to Forum Etiquette that has, (as far as I can see) not been mentioned yet.
For a debate to have any reasonable chance to provide meaningful dialogue, there has to be at least a level of common ground. For example, if the subject is some obscure interpretation of a bible passage between various groups of christians, then it is inappropriate for somebody to jump in with: why don't you rather pray to the flying spaghetti monster? or how can you be so stupid as to believe in a god in the first place?
At the same time, if the subject is a discussion like the "Principles of the Laws in the OT" thread, which is actually a discussion of a historical literary document, which does not pre-suppose a belief in god and can be examined objectively, then to come in and say: this is written by God, so you better believe it! is not actually productive.
My plea is for a recognition of, and respect for, the limits within which a specific discussion is taking place.
Originally posted by CalJustDo you also advise Christians not to jump into discussions about morality and human interactions in everyday life and start talking about people with different beliefs from them burning in hell for all eternity while claiming they themselves will live for ever and ever?
For example, if the subject is some obscure interpretation of a bible passage between various groups of christians, then it is inappropriate for somebody to jump in with: why don't you rather pray to the flying spaghetti monster? or how can you be so stupid as to believe in a god in the first place?
Sonhouse,
Your sent:
----------------
"as many insults, lies, and racist or sexist slurs as imaginable" thus far?
----------------
What I am talking about is such things given in a thread that don't matter in the discussion. Of course, there are other things to "avoid," but name calling out of bare criticism is not etiquette within a forum.
I am not trying to refer to extra things.