Just to lighten things up a little, take a peek at this site that features the Iraqi minister of information:
www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com
Good for a giggle, eh?
Englishman.
Let's tone down the America / War topics and get back on track
by Simon 59 Replies latest forum announcements
-
-
teejay
>>> I'd still of course be interested to hear your thoughts on this decision ... few decisions are ever really "final" so if you think I'm being mad, please let me know.
As Administrator you have a choice:
1. Let the board decide what topics it wants to talk about until *we* feel the topic has been thoroughly hashed out, or
2. Determine for us what we should discuss.
I’m cool with whatever decision you make, even if it's the wrong one.
-
larc
Where I live, I have learned, both early on in college, and later at work to attack ideas, not people. I have sent written material to reviewers for publication. They can be brutal in their critique of your work. You may feel insulted by their comments, but you have to keep in mind that they are not attacking you as a person. I think the same thing should be kept in mind here. (Let the reader use discernment.) I think people resort to insults when (a.) the other person has presented some facts and analysis that threatens the first person's position, or (b) when solid arguements fall on deaf ears and the person presenting solid arguements, vents out of frustration. Perhaps, we should keep one thing in mind. In all but the rarest of cases, we are not going to change the other persion's opinion, no matter how solid our case is and how weak the other person's position. In the book, Christian Science, Mark Twain put it this: All of our friends are crazy. No, they are not crazy in all areas of their thinking. They are just crazy in those areas where they disagree with us. (One of these days, I will put up a quote from that book.)
-
-
Valis
What larc said..
The thing I find most disheartening is that reasonable people who have been friends, to the extent one can be friends online, start discussing, then debating ,then arguing and finally get to the point everything goes to hell in a handbasket and they part ways. Just stupid on everyone's part in my opinion. And terribly sad. Perhaps it might be best if I just stuck to being overly over sarcastic and have absolutely no faith in the good will of anyone, that way there would be no disappointment in any of this...
Sincerely,
District Overbeer
-
-
-
-
wasasister
I am uncomfortable with "banning" certain topics, just because they are controversial.
Now that we have several forums available, including Members Only and Adults and Disagreements, could we not just move topics you (Simon) find controversial to one of these forums? I am also disappointed that so many of my favorite people here have resorted to labeling and name-calling. I wish we could carry on a discussion of this very important subject without lowering ourselves to this level.
The fact is, this war is on everyone's mind. It is hard to avoid the topic, and to try to pretend it isn't a major historical event is just frustrating. Like, "Let's not mention the elephant in the corner..."
As far as how the war has polarized people to extreme positions, I think this week's South Park episode summed it up nicely. In case you haven't seen it:
The town was divided between "Saddam-loving unpatriotic war protesters" and "bloodthirsty war mongering support the troops" factions. Of course, the boys got caught in the middle, trying to write a report about how America's founding fathers would have viewed the war.
In a flash-back, Cartman hears discussion in the Continental Congress about war vs. peace...looking strong or appearing weak to the English. Finally, Benjamin Franklin says: "America needs pro-war and anti-war factions. This way, other countries can hate our govenment without actually hating our people. It's the perfect way to say one thing and do another. We can appear peace-loving and still kick ass."
Simon, for some of us, this forum is where we go to discuss things on our minds. Many have just left behind most of the friends and associates they had. If we must limit our discussions to JW issues, this will become a very boring place.
My 2 cents,
Wasa
-
Angharad
1. Let the board decide what topics it wants to talk about until *we* feel the topic has been thoroughly hashed out, or
2. Determine for us what we should discuss.
Simon has not said there is an outright ban on these topics, just suggested that people limit the number of them that are started.
He has made repeated requests that people are civil to each other, but quite often has been ignored by some. Now if he did nothing about this people would complain nothing was being done about it, but if he trys to do something about it (hense this thread) that is also wrong. That is why he is asking for peoples opinions and suggestions.
There has never been topic censorship or JW related topics only on this forum and no one is suggesting that happens now.
Its a very difficult situation from Simon's point of view. Some people seem to look to Simon to deal with things that have insulted them, when they themselves have said things that could be interpreted as being insulting depending on your point of view. I do think some people are looking to take offence to things just as others are looking to offend.
I really cannot understand how some people cannot see the difference between the issue being discussed and the person, why must it become so personal just because you disagree on a certain subject.
BTW: hilarious site Englishman