Dragnix.Net

I would like to propose that a new forum be created, where opinions are announced, challenged, defended, and propagated. The standard rules of Netiquette still apply, though anyone may announce and defend their position.

In it we could host debates, whether they be on old issues (creation/evolotion, atheism/theism, pro-life/pro-choice, etc.)

So waddya think?

Although that can be done in the General section, I say "Go For It!"

Well, see, the current rules say no attempting to recruit anyone to your beliefs. In the proposed forum, that would be the entire point.

Sounds like a good idea to me.

Let's see if we can get Tempest to give it the okay.

Go for it.

Great idea, go for it!

I dont think that its such a good idea, think about it, you will get n00bs supporting different opinions and may cause arguments , bullying , hate mail; people may bring such topics in such as Religion, War, communism and more, this will cause a great "Un-wanted" deal of fuss and yet people are saying go for it i say nothing because you have to support the view of other peoples opinions and many people will not judge them right and will cause arguments upon the board and we dont want that now do we.
Jake.

Not really. I guess to compensate the penalties would have to be stricter. Though I suppose you're probably right.

Jake wrote:I don't think that its such a good idea, think about it, you will get n00bs supporting different opinions and may cause arguments , bullying , hate mail; people may bring such topics in such as Religion, War, communism and more, this will cause a great "Un-wanted" deal of fuss and yet people are saying go for it i say nothing because you have to support the view of other peoples opinions and many people will not judge them right and will cause arguments upon the board and we don't want that now do we.
Jake.

I vastly over looked that. I saw it as harmless debate but now I see it as a potential crisis. My vote for the time being is still "Go For It". However if the idea is denied, I would understand why.

I would like to see a forum where you can "feel free" but people debating may cause arguments,racism,bullying etc. this is a potential risk.

That's the point of debating. It is an argument. Remember 'mysterius origins of Man'?

"A good comprmise leaves everybody angry."
Ajihad, Eragon

At the end of the day we have a general disscussions board, this is here for a reason to chat, debate and have fun.

The thread called "Message Board Guidelines" in the general forum apply to the whole message board so any new forum would technically be subjected to the same rules; specific guidelines applying only to a particular section are labeled as either "Forum Guidelines" (specific forum) or "Section Guidelines" (specific forums group).

Also, note that the general guidelines have been carefully worded and since this topic deal with Rule #8, let me explain a bit more in detail the purpose of this rule:

Rule #8: No propaganda or preaching on the board wrote:This board is a place for discussion as individuals, not a platform for recruiting, propaganda and preaching ^[1]. I don't care what religion you believe into, you leave it at the door when using these forums ^[2]. You'll find me pretty intolerant to anyone who expects to be able to use this place to ram their agenda down other people's throats ^[3].

^[1]: Topics here should be discussed from an individual point of view. Someone who bases his/her argument on the viewpoint of someone else isn't really debating with other forum members; this person merely cuts and pastes information. This makes the debate pointless as the person often follow a script and move from one point to another without really listening to what other people have to say. Not to mention that debunking, voicing an opinion or adding precisions or small corrections in this kind of debate is time consuming for everyone and is not very rewarding for the reasons mentioned above. However, it is reasonable (and strongly encouraged) to support a point of view with external references, citation from experts in the domain, relevant real life examples and/or using fictional situations. However, the logic behind debate must come from the persons posting on this board.

As for the "recruiting, propaganda and preaching" part, experience tell me that someone matching the description of any of those words is, more often than not, unlikely to listen or even care about what other people are saying since such person is not here to have a discussion; s/he is here to rally people to his/her cause. Since you can't discuss with them, they can't use this board for their propaganda.

^[2]: This sentence cannot be clearer. There are countless religions around the globe that often directly contradict each other. Since it is not possible to prove that this or that religion is right and every others are wrong or that any religion is right at all, then there is no reason to even mention such affiliation on this board. Discussions are made from a point of view as neutral as possible; meaning that if someone think something should be that way, the argument s/he brings to support his/her claims must be acceptable by anyone (you leave your beliefs at the door). Ex: saying that scientists shouldn't play god by tampering with the genetic code of humans because humans have been created to god image and as such DNA (sequences) is (somehow) sacred, will not only be frowned upon but also be considered as a display of poor debate skills. On the other hand, saying that scientists shouldn't modify the genetic code because of many long term uncertainties, potential cross-generation effects and probable social problems resulting from the "Have" and "Have Not" is a valid argument no matter what the beliefs of the persons involved in the discussion.

^[3]: This sentence deal with what kind of leniency is to be expected over this rule...


In other words, there is nothing in the guidelines that prevent you from having such kind of debates here if everyone brings valid and reasonable arguments and if the discussion remains civil and respectful.

However, as it was already mentioned in this thread, potentially inflammatory issues can easily degenerate and contrary to popular belief, gun debate, abortion or 'evolution vs creationism' usually do not result in a 'good discussion', but simply a heated argument until people realize that the other side is clearly not listening to them.

I still say "go for it" because I think people have a lot to say, they just don't know where or when to say it. There would have to be specific rules as to what topics are banned (because the argument just goes circular).

I'll side with tempest, actually. The likelyhood of such a Forum degenerating into a catfight area is too high.

i would say go for it, but it would be hard to keep those who want to push racial and religious beliefs from offending others. if it was a forum to debate dragon issues (which would kinda make it part of the dragon disscussion board) then it would be easier, but that could also escalade into harsh comments if someone has a stubborn head and tempered fingers.

*holds head* so many opinions!
I don't know, Jake and Tempest raised several important points. It may be a good idea, it may not. Tempest? What's the final verdict?

I vote nay'. Enough drama in the boards we have at times

So far Falconer, the verdict looks to be nay. Twas a good idea but unfortunately the potential for a "war of words" is too great.

Yea i would say no...Opinions lead into arguments You always get different opinions and this can lead to drama and flaming

and life is dramatic enough without one more place on the internet flaming with criticisms, i come here to get out of that type of stuff....very peacefull here.

Falconer wrote:What's the final verdict?

That's the million-dollar question: make two debates on exactly the same subject and one may result in a flamewar, the other in a philosophical debate that would make Plato nods in approval.

Obviously the later is welcome here, even on controversial subjects (well, let just say "on most subjects") and the former is not. It's all about on how the debate is done (in doubt, it's preferable to stay on the safe side and not bring such debates here).

Tempest wrote:

Falconer wrote:What's the final verdict?

That's the million-dollar question: make two debates on exactly the same subject and one may result in a flamewar, the other in a philosophical debate that would make Plato nods in approval.

Obviously the later is welcome here, even on controversial subjects (well, let just say "on most subjects") and the former is not. It's all about on how the debate is done (in doubt, it's preferable to stay on the safe side and not bring such debates here).

Yeah I agree cant be having flamewars!