YesNoOk
avatar

New Rule: No Religion Discussion. (Read 13667 times)

Started by Bastard Walt, May 05, 2010, 09:53:27 pm
Share this topic:

Poll

Religious discussions have a place in the MFG demographic audience!

Not really.
26 (39.4%)
Sure, we should discuss our religious views!
40 (60.6%)

Total Members Voted: 65

Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#181  May 06, 2010, 09:56:12 pm
  • ******
    • Canada
    • Skype - templovesu
I reiterate:

On Shamrock mocking people and setting a bad example:
"Theatrical version"
http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=115611.0

Once it was seen to be OK'd to mock other users because a moderator did it:
http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=115612.0

Banning him doesn't dispute that this is a blatant disregard for not only not staying objective on the matter, but also blatantly disregarding netiquette as a moderator in a section that's supposed to be for actual suggestions not a place for moderators to take the stage and mock someone in some kind of dramatic fashion.

I still find it disgusting that you're okay with that type of behavior.
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#182  May 06, 2010, 09:59:00 pm
  • ******
  • Somebody PM when Caddie is no longer a mod.
Tempest. He said "eat a dick" after you called me an "asshole". Who set the example?

Although i will admit that I was mocking with that thread. I thought it would be funny while at the same time prove a point. That might have been a little far. 
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#183  May 06, 2010, 10:01:40 pm
  • ******
    • Canada
    • Skype - templovesu
Tempest. He said "eat a dick" after you called me an "asshole". Who set the example?
UM yeah, just ignore what I said about him making the topic because of you, almost immediately after in fact. Not to mention the mocking posts you endorsed with your cheap brand of sarcasm after his ad-lib post. Real mature.

And you can't honestly say that people only insult others because a "staff member did it". Quit grasping at straws, you're really not that great a guy.
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#184  May 06, 2010, 10:03:48 pm
  • ******
  • Somebody PM when Caddie is no longer a mod.
But that is what you are saying. You are saying he went over the top because of me. Yet it can't be because of you.
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#185  May 06, 2010, 10:04:41 pm
  • ******
    • Canada
    • Skype - templovesu
Because looking at his post history, the guy was already volatile to begin with. You just gave him an endorsement which made it "OK" to him. Are you just not taking everything into account on purpose now or what?
* All definitions extracted from dictionary.com
#186  May 06, 2010, 10:09:41 pm
  • ******
  • ALE ALEJANDRO
I do set an example. I'm not going personal against you. I have not called you names, but you have called me names. All I've done is state opinion in topics at hand. Opinions that you do not agree with. I debate them. You could do the same, but instead you just want to stop me from being allowed to state them.

[...] I never called you an idiot of douchebag for it.

[...] adults can talk about adult things in a civil matter
No, I want you to state them in a reasonable fashion, without implying people to be dumb for having beliefs, and mocking their valued EVERYTHING Supreme Beings, Admired Prophets, Sacred Books.

So far I can recall calling you constantly 2 things, and apparently the fact that you keep bringing it up as "walt isn't being civil because he's calling me names" means that you resent it.

Idiot (Word Origin & History)
c.1300, "person so mentally deficient as to be incapable of ordinary reasoning" ( hey, wouldn't it ocurr to you that mocking people's beliefs might end up in arguments like this? )

Dick - (Vulgar) A person, especially a man, regarded as mean or contemptible (contempt - the feeling with which a person regards anything considered mean, vile, or worthless; disdain; scorn.)

I constantly call you a DICK because you're and IDIOT, and those are merely objective descriptive adjectives of the situation I'm pointing out. I'm not making a value judgement, I'm just describing you and the attitudes I perceive in you and your comments.
"We live in a world of perpetual outrage"
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#187  May 06, 2010, 10:15:03 pm
  • ******
  • Does this looks like the face of mercy?
Say, was this topic about now allowing religious discussions because of disrespectful behavior from certian people regarding other people's beliefs.

... or was it about now allowing Shamrock to post because of him being ... well a prick.
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#188  May 06, 2010, 10:16:01 pm
  • ******
  • Somebody PM when Caddie is no longer a mod.
I see there is not point in discussing this with either of you any further. I mean we have now reached just circle talking and insults.

Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#189  May 06, 2010, 10:16:31 pm
  • ******
    • Canada
    • Skype - templovesu
Sounds a lot like previous religious debates if you ask me ::)

Wasn't it you who ridiculed religious people for running out of real things to say?

Where's your MESSIAH NOW >:)
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#190  May 06, 2010, 10:19:36 pm
  • ******
  • ALE ALEJANDRO
Not to mention it all continues to circle back to the point where you can't debate that you're a dick.

This isn't about freedom of speech, you can't invoke the first amendment. These boards' rules have changed according to use and practice, and the events of the past couple of months have proven that the current userbase can show no civility about this sensitive topic, so I stand by my proposition to avoid it on the grounds that religious conversations are sterile, since nobody will change anybody's mind, and they can easily end up as nasty arguments.

Nobody wins anything, and many can lose much. Simple.
"We live in a world of perpetual outrage"
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#191  May 06, 2010, 10:21:41 pm
  • ******
  • Somebody PM when Caddie is no longer a mod.
So we should change the rules because you can't be civil. Sorry, my last response. Not really for your sake. More for an end to argument.
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#192  May 06, 2010, 10:24:45 pm
  • ******
  • ALE ALEJANDRO
sorry baby, we should change the rules because you can't be civil.



Shamrock saying Jesus is "an asshat"
So why would I choose to read a book that has one guy who isn't an asshat when I can read books written by people who aren't asshats and they don't send me to an entire eternity of fire and brimstone if I don't do exactly what he write about?

Shamrock calling God a "terrorist in the sky"
Christians do things because they are scared of defying the invisible terrorist in the sky.
"We live in a world of perpetual outrage"
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#193  May 06, 2010, 10:26:37 pm
  • ******
    • Canada
    • Skype - templovesu
Still endorsing a debate section as an alternative. Not only does this not "protect butthurt people" , but because of the nature of the board, oversensitive people or people who can't "be civil" on matters will be disallowed or at the very least, discouraged from participating. It would at least allow actual debates on matters, rather than shit flinging after a few decent posts. Also more dimensions to discussions etc etc.

The only reason I don't see this working or a reason for people thinking it might not work, is because the userbase isn't capable of this, otherwise I think it'd work fine, we separated gaming from fighting gaming, why not separate debate discussion from normal discussion?

Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#194  May 06, 2010, 10:32:15 pm
  • ****
  • Mach Punch Zoning Arm
    • USA
    • tinyurl.com/zstrinmu

Shamrock saying Jesus is "an asshat"
So why would I choose to read a book that has one guy who isn't an asshat when I can read books written by people who aren't asshats and they don't send me to an entire eternity of fire and brimstone if I don't do exactly what he write about?

At risk of getting shot, you're still saying the wrong thing about that first quote. "The one guy who isn't the asshat" is referring to Jesus.

Look, this thread isn't supposed to be about Shamrock, it's supposed to be about people choosing to bash religion threads. We've already established that yes, Shamrock has over-stated or over-reacted to some things, but those things are over and done with. Could he do with being a bit more careful? Yes, maybe. (MY OPINION ONLY, OK?)

But is that what we're here to discuss right this moment? No.

Will discussing it right this moment honestly change anything? NO.


So, let's at least try to move on.

Also, my thoughts on a debate thread more or less come down to this:

The only reason I don't see this working or a reason for people thinking it might not work, is because the userbase isn't capable of this, otherwise I think it'd work fine.

It'd be nice, but with the track record we have now we'd be making a new trainwreck, IMO.
Youtube 
Twitter
Ask.fm
Zero-Sennin's Workshop
Quote
[22:18] <Ebil_Homer> because you messed up?
[22:18] <Ebil_Homer> well that's a fucking shame
[22:18] <Ebil_Homer> pick up your sucks
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#195  May 06, 2010, 10:35:53 pm
  • ***
  • The New Age Of Mugen
Quote
past couple of months have proven that the current userbase can show no civility about this sensitive topic

who's fucking fault is that??? excuse my language and passion but the arguments that keep being presented in these threads are ridiculous....it's not the mods or anybody else's fault that the user-base can't handle certain topics. It's their fault for joining conversations that they know they can't converse about civilly. Honestly, nobody is pointing a gun to anybody's head and making them press the reply button. They are pressing it by choice and deserve to be held accountable....This is like asking people to not discuss politics because a lot of people can't handle the debates.....please, taking it away is not the answer....what is the answer is making sure people who can't handle arguments(whether they be humorous or distasteful)  stay out of them. I agree that Shamrock has a unique personality that can offend people, but if you really don't like it then why continue to converse with him....it's not a crime to state your opinion and if he really goes over then he should be called on it but I still believe that these threads are only here because people are so religiously attached that they can't think clearly.....religion should not influence our decisions and no matter what you guys say, it is VERY EVIDENT that it has.....nobody here is 5 years old so stop taking away their "fighting games" because you fear that they'll decide to beat up a kid in their class.........I expect all of you to know your limits and when you feel that you can no longer handle the debate or wish to be apart of it, don't get into a flame war, simply remove yourself.....it's ridiculous how teenagers and adults can argue over the pettiest things when we should more focused on other matters......regardless if you agree or disagree with Shamrock's ways(he's not gonna change) is trivial.....let it go and move on.......if you continue to argue about this than you either haven't read this post or don't want to change.........

"can't we all just get along???"

Hopefully....
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#196  May 06, 2010, 10:43:43 pm
  • ******
  • ALE ALEJANDRO
I agree that Shamrock has a unique personality that can offend people [...] it's not a crime to state your opinion and if he really goes over then he should be called on it

regardless if you agree or disagree with Shamrock's ways(he's not gonna change) is trivial [...] if you continue to argue about this than you either haven't read this post or don't want to change
Agreed, not the place to discuss this any furth-OH WAIT THE OTHER THREAD IS LOCKED.


User above overlooks that main offenders are GMod and Admin, making it a clear issue ::)
"We live in a world of perpetual outrage"
Last Edit: May 06, 2010, 10:46:52 pm by [Black Dynamite]
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#197  May 07, 2010, 12:10:19 am
  • ******
  • Legendary XIII
  • I am the eye of the storm to come!
    • New Zealand
    • network.mugenguild.com/cyanide/
Part of the reason you become a mod/admin/whatever in ANY forum is because you're one of the vocal members. People who are recognised and well known. You aren't one of these people if you never bloody well post anywhere.

You know that, you WERE one. Also, until Shamrock directly insults you it would be appreciated if you stopped insulting him. If you want to talk about examples to follow, be one yourself thanks.


In M.U.G.E.N there is no magic button

They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance.
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#198  May 07, 2010, 12:21:52 am
  • ******
  • does this look like the face of mercy?
Walt. about persecution.
you repeatedly post shamrock quote then claim it means something else, you know that making a thread about religion like this would only mock more the subject, you keep calling out a talking point that is usually used by rednecks, claiming that christians are persecuted

dont claim being persecuted, thats a terrible thing to claim, specially compared to actually being persecuted. No one is crucifying you for your beliefs like they did in japan to christians.
You are just using it as an excuse to try to get at shamrock.Its either that or i would have to consider you as being stupid, and you are not stupid. So you are trying to troll, and are simply horrible at it. ( "see, im PERSECUTING shamrock, how does that feel!")  otherwise you would have even answered when he pointed out the america thing instead of trying to shift the subject.  Terrible at trolling, you make no point and you make yourself look far more stupid than everyone knows you are.
No one here is going to believe you are at that level, you are a smart educated man that doesnt roll that way.

After discussing it out with titiln there is these things to be said on the matter.
Religious discussion will not be censored. if you think you might be offended by what happens in a religious discussion it is advised that you stay out.

bringing up someone's religious views in an unrelated discussion is considered poor practice and should not be done.
Use common sense, there is no need to go after people and poke fun at them. That includes continuously going after stormex as it has been happening. Cut that out.

Be more sensible.
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#199  May 07, 2010, 12:24:51 am
  • ***
  • The New Age Of Mugen
Quote
Religious discussion will not be censored. if you think you might be offended by what happens in a religious discussion it is advised that you stay out.

Thank you
Re: New Rule: No Religion Discussion.
#200  May 07, 2010, 12:32:51 am
  • ******
  • Q.E.D.
    • USA
    • network.mugenguild.com/jmorphman
Spoiler, click to toggle visibilty
I think this is the best choice.