On respect for the belief of others. Sorry for the long post

by StarTrekAngel 372 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Simon

  Two things I think are rather sad:

  1. People complaining about likes and dislikes they receive
  

  2. People using likes and dislikes as 'retaliation'

  Sometimes it's the same people doing both. It stops, now.

  And just to be clear, if people are using the like and dislike feature for purposes other than they are intended then they will be blocked from voting and all their votes will be removed.

  It is clear for me to see when someone makes multiple consecutive votes against posts by the same poster which are obviously not based on the content of the post but who made them. It's childish and won't be tolerated.

  In the meantime, quit yer bitchin' about it.
• 

  EdenOne

  My mother is 80 and in the early stages of Alzheimers. She doesn't understand why I don't go to the meetings anymore. She keeps asking me to go with her, and I repeatedly have to say no. When she tries to play the emotional card on me, I simply say that "there are some things I don't agree with anymore", and leave it at that. Why on earth would I go and attempt to destroy her cherished earthly paradise hope? Why would I attempt to reason her out of believing in God? Wouldn't that be insensitive and cruel? If anything, I perhaps might feel entitled to get back at her for raising me into this awful cult where I've spent 40 years of my life, but what good would it do?

  Eden
• 

  Oubliette

  It is clear for me to see when someone makes multiple consecutive votes against posts by the same poster which are obviously not based on the content of the post but who made them. It's childish and won't be tolerated.

  Thank you. That is a policy/practice which I would approve.
  

  -
  

  In the meantime, quit yer bitchin' about it.

  If you're referring to my comments about the "Like/Dislike" feature, it would appear that you are missing the point I was trying to make. Allow me to attempt to clarify. I am neither complaining nor "bitchin'" about it. I am pointing out that it is a feature that is frequently misused by people that won't engage in meaningful dialogue. I believe this is extremely relevant to the point and content of the OP.

  Categorizing my observations as complaints or "bitchin'" is neither accurate nor productive.

  I asked for clarification from EdenOne. He obliged but someone else "Disliked" my request. I asked said anonymous person to explain. They have not.
  

  A few pages back I posted several links to lists of commonly held false beliefs that ranged from trivial to dangerously harmful. I think it's odd that no one seemed interesting commenting on those.

  This thread seems to have a lot of really good content, but a lot of it has been derailed by a few posters that seem to enjoy personally attacking each other no matter what the topic. That is unfortunate.
  
• 

  Oubliette

  I would like to add to my previous comments and affirm the part of StarTrekAngel's post with which I concur: it is possible to disagree with someone's comments and/or beliefs without attacking them personally.

  It is also possible to read what others have to say without taking it personally.

  As CodedLogic posted earlier in this thread:

  1. Don't take it personally,
  2. Don't make it personal

  -
  

  Those are good rules to post by!
• 

  Simon

  He obliged but someone else "Disliked" my request. I asked said anonymous person to explain. They have not.

  Maybe someone simply disliked your demand for explanations.

  This thread seems to have a lot of really good content, but a lot of it has been derailed by a few posters that seem to enjoy personally attacking each other no matter what the topic. That is unfortunate.

  And then you derail it with lots of off-topic posts. You are being 'part of the problem' on this.

  I'm sorry, but complaining that people "use" the like / dislike feature and (omg, shock) someone had the temerity to dislike one of your posts seems petty. Making an issue of it isn't helping.
• 

  Oubliette

  Maybe someone simply disliked your demand for explanations.

  Perhaps. Although my intention was a request not a demand, but I'll concede that might be how they perceived it. Either way, since that person chose to not respond I guess we'll never know.

  What you see as "temerity," I see as an example of passive-aggressive failure to engage on content which is what I believe this thread is really about and therefore very on topic.

  I see you've been busy editing out posts you don't like and/or approve. Can you please explain how that helps the discussion?
  
• 

  Retrovirus

  For Phizzy and Cofty:

  Lawd forbid that an iggorant farmgirl from a former penal colony should bore Your Wisdom!

  That was the succinct and anti-tedium bit J. Detail next post.

  Retro
• 

  Retrovirus

  Cofty,

  Firstly, although the OP does not mention theology, the topic it is under can be regarded as the context. Lucky I only whispered, but no strawman, agreed.

  Second “bad ideas”. If an idea or belief is asserted as reality on a religious forum it is of course open to debate. But the term “bad ideas” is still a tad Orwellian and intimidating. After all, positing unconventional ideas as theorems is a necessary part of scientific advance.

  Thirdly, my alleged “obsession with tone”. No apologies, that is indeed the main issue for me. Debate is one thing, but using putdowns and assumptions of authority and/or superior understanding will intimidate people struggling to rebuild their ideas and many whose first language is not English. Worse, these tactics encourage other posters to go the step further to name-calling and outright insults.

  IMO, calling the debate “robust” or “vigorous” in no way justifies such tactics.

  “ridiculing” is actually a bit more difficult. Reductio ad absurdum is a valid form of argument, but ridicule is also very likely to evoke a personal reaction, and therefore risky at best. Risky, that is, if the aim is to get a person to think beyond his/her boundaries, rather than to ‘win’.

  Happy to discuss further if you wish, Retro.
• 

  cofty

  Retro - I have said all I want to say in my first post on page 1 of this thread.
• 

  Simon

  I see you've been busy editing out posts you don't like and/or approve. Can you please explain how that helps the discussion?

  No, I removed completely off topic comments about kittens. Refer to the terms of use / posting guidelines.