Thank you, and evidently they are not tolerated.

This is what I mean when I say that policing of his site is too heavy, and people can't express themselves properly without being ripped apart.

Reply 44

Tyler Durden

17

Beekeeper

If I said "Christians usually want homosexuals to burn in hell" in public, I would not be punished.

It is personal opinion, and I would be using my own freedom of speech, a fundamental civil liberty.
Why do these civil liberties not exist on TSR?

Yeah, but equally you would not be punished in real life if there was a debate going on between a group of people and you kept trying to change the subject to something irrelevant. That's what SPAM does and that's why it's deleted (and rightly so). I'd be extremely annoyed if I made a thread about something I felt was serious and then someone came along and started spamming and changing the entire discussion.

In the same way what does "Christians want homosexuals to burn in hell" add to a conversation? I don't mean to sound patronising, but you're a clever bloke so you can see that's not going to further the conversation and is going to offend some people. It's perhaps even true but there are better ways of going about discussing the issue.

Reply 45

Tyler Durden

17

Lauren

What's with the pedantry?

LOL.

Lauren... this is Vienna..

Vienna... this is Lauren..

Reply 46

Vienna

12

Lauren

It's irrelevant to the original point. What's with the pedantry?

"Erm, someone taking the micky out of Homosexuality *IS* racial hatrid"

Is that true or not?

Reply 47

Beekeeper

OP

13

Lauren

I didn't say that. I just thought from your original post you'd be sensible enough to:
a. know that it's not true
b. not make inflammatory comments

I'm sensible enough to have my own opinions, and I'm comfortable with sharing them. I couldn't give a damn whether or not it goes against what someone else believes, I should have the right to post it, and it shouldn't be deleted, let alone earn me warning points.
The comment was reasoned in the context, I rarely make such comments without substantiating them to some degree.

Thats not the point though, it shouldn't have been deleted, and it is just one example of some of the heavy policing on TSR.
If members are to cooperate, this needs to stop now.

Reply 48

Vienna

12

Beekeeper

I'm sensible enough to have my own opinions, and I'm comfortable with sharing them. I couldn't give a damn whether or not it goes against what someone else believes, I should have the right to post it, and it shouldn't be deleted, let alone earn me warning points.
The comment was reasoned in the context, I rarely make such comments without substantiating them to some degree.

Hear Hear.

Reply 49

kingslaw

14

Good thread.

Can I add one other request?

-More leniance on the posting of pictures involving nudity.

I think my work here is done.

Thanks for listening :smile:

Reply 50

Beekeeper

OP

13

englishstudent

Yeah, but equally you would not be punished in real life if there was a debate going on between a group of people and you kept trying to change the subject to something irrelevant. That's what SPAM does and that's why it's deleted (and rightly so). I'd be extremely annoyed if I made a thread about something I felt was serious and then someone came along and started spamming and changing the entire discussion.

In the same way what does "Christians want homosexuals to burn in hell" add to a conversation? I don't mean to sound patronising, but you're a clever bloke so you can see that's not going to further the conversation and is going to offend some people. It's perhaps even true but there are better ways of going about discussing the issue.

In a thread discussing christian attitudes to homosexuality, the comment was in context and it was later substantiated.

Reply 51

Tyler Durden

17

Vienna

"Erm, someone taking the micky out of Homosexuality *IS* racial hatrid"

Is that true or not?

No, but I think you know what he meant.

Anyway, inciting religious hatred will soon be illegal too.

But as mentioned earlier, this is not the real world. There are different rules.

Reply 52

Tyler Durden

17

Beekeeper

In a thread discussing christian attitudes to homosexuality, the comment was in context and it was later substantiated.

Well then I don't see the problem. You no longer have warning points, the unsubstantiated sweeping statement is gone and in its place there is a new post explaining why you believe that Christians hold that view on gays.

Reply 53

Vienna

12

englishstudent

No, but I think you know what he meant.

Im not going to guess my way around the forum. If criticising religion is banned under the pretext its a race we have serious problems. I made that point clear, to which I was told that it was racial hatred. I responded in kind. Its highly relevant to Beekeeper's idea of liberalising the forum. Religion is ideology and fair game.

Reply 54

NDGAARONDI

16

Vienna

If criticising religion is banned under the pretext...

So, as I view the news I hear about the Church of England moving towards ordaining of women so that you can have women bishops, I cannot criticise it? :eek:

Reply 55

musicbloke

17

I worry when I start agreeing with Vienna. A, I seriously recommend that you don't moderate threads for "Racial hatrid[sic]" until you have some kind of an understanding of whatr it means.

The UN defines racism as:

"any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life."

Now, this does not include homophobia or, more importantly arguments about religion. Religion is just an ideology that is based on the supernatural or some kind of ontological anomoly. This does not make them beyond critism and I seriously object to you modding posts for being anti-religion. If you want to know about what the bible says about homosexuality then I recommend you read it yourself - it is certainly not a matter of interpretation.

MB

Reply 56

Acaila

17

Not wanting to get involved, but isn't inciting religious hatred now an offence as well? I seem to recall something on the news about that reasonably recently.
{hugs the denizens of the thread and wanders out}

Reply 57

Apollo

11

beekeeper

To improve TSR I would recommend the following:

- Liberal, relaxed rules surrounding reputation. IMO, if people want to wh0re then they should be able to, if people want to insult each other in rep then they should be able to. There should certainly not be even tighter controls, that for example Vienna is calling for.

I think rep whoring totally defeats the purpose of the system. I also don't think that allowing insults over rep is going to help anyone.

- Less sub-snobbery. The relentless newbie bashing is unhealthy for TSR, it goes without saying really.

Couldn't agree more.

- Moderators need to relax and sit back. The current approach is far too authoritarian and it is IMO dividing mods and normal members. If this carries on, there will be reduced respect for the moderation.
At the same time, some members need to give mods more of a chance, rather than starting a thread everytime something happens to have a moan and to poke fun at the mods.
When this happens, the intention is purely to antagonise mods and divide members, because if they really wanted an explanation, they would take it to the Ask a Mod forum first, rather than "About" which is visible to the whole of TSR and usually fuels some bitter arguing.

In theory, sounds great. But I think mods sitting back all of a sudden and not deleting things that used to get deleted is going to cause a lot of confusion and problems.

- Less post reporting unless it is neccessary. I for one am sick of scrolling down threads to find that half the posts have been deleted because they are all "spam". Policing on this site is too heavy.

The vast majority of post reports seem to be right on.

Of course theres more problems but these are key IMO to improving TSR. This advice will probably be ignored, but I would atleast like people to think about what I'm saying.

:smile:

Thanks,
Anthony

In theory I agree with a lot of what you are saying, I just dunno how workable it is.

Reply 58

Onearmedbandit

17

Beekeeper

For example, I made a post a few weeks ago that read "All christians want is for homosexuals to burn in hell", which wouldn't go down too well with christians, but what do i care? We have free speech in reality, why not on TSR?

So ... you really believe that all Christians want is for homosexuals to burn in hell?

I'm not religious, but personally I think they want a few other things too... like to win the Apocalypse :cool:

Reply 59

Lush Law

15

I completely agree with you, Beekeeper.

I can't believe your thread "All christians want is for homosexuals to burn in hell" was classed as attempting to incite racial hatred! Wtf!? I think it was a silly thing to post [despite the fact that it was probably intended to be far fetched] but homosexuality is not a race, neither is Christianity. So race did not come into your thread - at all.

An appeal to TSR

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you