Lying Rule...

[Gnu Ordure]

Quick question for the Mods...

If someone calls someone a liar, which Forum rule are they breaking?

[HAL]

Quick question for the Mods...

If someone calls someone a liar, which Forum rule are they breaking?

Oh! Me! Me! I can help you Gnu.

As such, forum members are expected to back up assertions they make ...

[kin hell]

bm

[screwtape]

Quick question for the Mods...

If someone calls someone a liar, which Forum rule are they breaking?

Can it be shown that the member actually is lying?  And I don't mean that in some high falutin' philosophical sense where they have been told some fact over and over and yet, do not believe it, but by christ, they've been told.  I mean in the simplest, most basic sense of the word.  Is the accusee saying something he or she knows to be untrue with the intent of deception, and can the accuser show that is so?

Please don't try to lawyer this.  I think it is a pretty plain and straightforward idea.  I'm a little surprised and disappointed a group of allegedly rational adults need to have this conversation.

[HAL]

It's simple - just like the YouTube video I posted where George tells Jerry -

"It's not a lie if you believe it"

If they believe what they are saying it's not a lie, and for you to be able to say it's a lie you'd have to uncover/demonstrate a great deal more than is possible to discover over the internets, I would imagine.

Believing something dumb is not a lie - it's just sloppy thinking/faith/compartmentalization.

[Gnu Ordure]

Thanks, guys.




I have another question, if you don't mind. The Rules don't seem mention the use of insults, specifically. Are they allowed - or perhaps some are allowed but not others? (The rules refer to 'excessive vulgarity').

[Emily]

I think I know what this is in reference too.

As Hal said, calling someone a liar doesn't mean they are one. The theists on or that come to this forum have a moderate to strong belief in what they hold as true. We might know their beliefs are not true but they hold that belief because they have been taught it to be true.

If that theist said in one thread something like:

"God created the heavens and the earth 6000 years ago.............................."

and a great debate goes on about that quote and that theist backpedals and says something like

"I never said that!"

Poor example, but that would be a lie, because they clearly did say the heavens and the earth were created by god 6000 thousand years ago.

IDK: I don't think someone should be called a liar simply because what others have said about how their belief is not true doesn't sink into their minds, or that they have a different belief and make a claim that we (the atheists on this forum) know is not true.

If a theist makes a claim about XYZ and someone says, "you lie (blah, blah, blah)", it's not necessarily a lie. It's just the theist stating what they believe is true. 

I am not a mod, as you all know, but I have begun to recognize the mods decisions that they have made, whether it be a post in a particular thread, or with a video posted in a different part of the forum. And I just wanted to give my 2 cents, because (if this thread is about what I think it is) I've been following it pretty closely.

[Gnu Ordure]

I think I know what this is in reference to.

Actually Em, this is mainly in reference to me having recently undertaken the onerous and if I may so, appallingly underpaid position of Forum Guide.

It occurred to me yesterday that part of my duties may be to explain to a confused newbie the Forum's Rules and how they're applied.

It then occurred me that I don't really know the Forum's Rules and how they're applied.

So this thread is only a request for information from more experienced members.

But feel free to discuss stuff if you want to.

[kin hell]

So this thread is only a request for information from more experienced members.

But feel free to discuss stuff if you want to.

5000+ posts ...not experienced enough?    syntax slur

[screwtape]

I have another question, if you don't mind. The Rules don't seem mention the use of insults, specifically. Are they allowed - or perhaps some are allowed but not others? (The rules refer to 'excessive vulgarity').

It would fall under several categories:

Do not post SPAM, advertisements, porn, chain letters, warez, executable programs, or other content that would be destructive or disruptive of the Forum's function.

Insults can be disruptive to the forum function.

Responses to a thread must be on-topic and should contribute constructively to the discussion at hand

If a post is just an insult, it is off topic, does not contribute, is not constructive.

Trolling other forum members, grudge matches, soap-opera dramas, and other actions that staff members deem to be designed to disrupt threads or provoke hostile emotional responses from other forum members will not be tolerated.

insults are generally intended to provoke hostile emotional responses.

[MadBunny]

This is probably not a save zone for me to wade into, as it's my opinion that there is no such thing as a lawyer proof rule that still makes sense. 

I'm kind of with Hal on this one, when people say something for example "You're lying" then they should follow it up with "You're lying because you state XYZ, which are untrue."
Of course this then shifts it into the category of 'is it a lie if they don't think it's a lie' and 'if you can't prove it you don't know it's not a lie' and so on.

Ultimately if you're not able to tell somebody that they lied, or to illustrate the inaccuracy of their position via their own words then any conversation auto-fails at that point.  Its always been my opinion that people don't inherently have a right to not be offended by something.  If being called out as a liar, whether the words used to express it are sweet or bitter offends; then the problem lies with the offended.

People have the amazing capacity to be insulted by virtually anything.  Probably me posting this is offending somebody.[1]

I guess the rule of thumb "don't be a dick" could have an addendum that states: "if you have to, then be a normal one and not some huge mutant porn star sized dick."

Actually Em, this is mainly in reference to me having recently undertaken the onerous and if I may so, appallingly underpaid position of Forum Guide.

It occurred to me yesterday that part of my duties may be to explain to a confused newbie the Forum's Rules and how they're applied.

It then occurred me that I don't really know the Forum's Rules and how they're applied.

So this thread is only a request for information from more experienced members.

But feel free to discuss stuff if you want to.

You're not kidding about being underpaid!

The last iteration of the rules I read were pretty straightforward.

My own experience in the drivers seat is that there will never be a satisfactory answer.  The rules can only be so comprehensive before it gets to TL:DR territory, which IMO thanks to twitter has become a lot less than it used to be.  When in doubt try to adhere to the 'don't be a dick' philosophy and when that fails remember that a forum is not a democracy.  Ultimately it performs a function, and even though that function contains lots of leeway, it's still a function.

1.	Probably Hal, who worked a lot harder than I did and deserves a whole lot more credit for it.