Author Topic: New Members Limited to Starting Topics  (Read 1693 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 18290
  • Darwins +640/-134
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« on: May 18, 2009, 08:11:42 PM »
Going by what Airyaman states in this topic: http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?topic=6590 -- that we limit new members to making a specific amount of posts before being able to create a topic as a way to minimize drive-by members. They seem to be creating accounts just to post their rhetoric and then never come back.

I also feel to minimize people from creating topics and not responding that if they do not respond in their own topic, whether they respond in other topics being irrelevant, but if one creates a topic, and someone asks a question and they never respond to any of the questions posed by others, that their ability of posting topics be taken away for a period of time. First warning perhaps 3 days, Second warning 2 weeks, 3rd warning a month etc.,

The whole point, or at least one of the points of this website is dialog, yet, if people are just able to create topics without responding in them (val being a good example of one who does this) then it just shows weakness on the website not to be able to handle drive-by's and also members who may comment in other topics but not their own.

More structure in such regard needs to be implemented.

-Nam
"presumptions are the bitch of all assumptions" -- me

Offline Kevlar83

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #1 on: May 19, 2009, 10:05:23 AM »
I hate to disagree with you, being a new member and all, but in my opinion nobody is forcing you to read the topics. Also, nobody is forcing you to respond to rhetoric and propaganda. I might not have a lot of sway, and I might not be that well known in this community (yet), but taking away my ability to start a conversation on a topic I wish to talk about due to annoyance derived from another member, well its unfair to me. It's censorship in it's literal form. What if a college professor said that I couldn't make a comment within his or her class until I had written a few essay that had been graded so I know what that professor liked to hear? Also, what would keep new members from posting walls of text on other threads? On a further note, while I might be new to the community, I feel this place is a safe place to say what you think is right, regardless whether it jives well with the rest of the community or not.

Again, being a new member, I might not hold a lot of sway with my opinions, but instilling this would be a way of cause a level of elitism within the community, and there's no better way to make someone not feel welcome than saying that you have to prove yourself welcome to be here...

just my 2 cents...
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    -Edmund Burke

Somewhat cliche, but appropriate...

Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #2 on: May 19, 2009, 10:13:45 AM »
The problem with your response Kevlar83, is that you do not realize how many people sign up here, start a thread, and then never return to address the responses. Just browse through the member list to see how many people have only one or two posts. We call them "drive by" posters. While this might happen at other forums, we seem to have a rash of theists who do this here.

As to you comparison, the student is signing up for a whole quarter/semester and should be able to ask questions. Posters who never intend to address responses to their threads are much different.
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Offline CosmicScherzo

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 411
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • What would Jesus brew?
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #3 on: May 19, 2009, 10:16:09 AM »
I agree, Nam.  We could stand to get rid of some clutter around here.

A post count minimum of around 20 or 25 would weed out drive-bys, while not posing much of an obstacle to serious posters.

The obvious exception would be the Introductions board, where anyone should be able to post immediately.  Any preaching there could be quickly trashed.
"What claim has your piety on my deference?"

Offline Kevlar83

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #4 on: May 19, 2009, 10:20:26 AM »
But isn't that contradictive to the mission statement on http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/god-devoted.htm page also?

Again I have been a moderator on many forums, I know the frustration it causes, but you have to see the irony of your statements. The webpage says:

Quote from: Whywontgodhealamputees.com link=http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/god-devoted.htm
Would you like to spread your belief to others so that they can see what you see? If so, we would love to hear from you. Please visit the forum and give us your testimony. Tell us why you believe, and why your belief is important to you.

    * What is it that makes your belief so strong?

    * How has God worked in your life?

    * Why do you think it is important for others to believe?

    * Are there any miracles or personal experiences that you have seen, either in your life or in the lives of others, that you would like to share?

Tell your story so others can witness the way that the Lord moves in your life. Invite other people from your church to join you and share their stories as well. Think of your testimony as a missionary activity. Let your light shine and be a fisher of men by helping others to understand what faith in God really means.

It doesn't say anything about having to stay around, does it? It just says make a testimony, not start a conversation....

All I am saying is that you guys are being kinda christian contradictory here, low blow, but I abhor censorship in ANY form...
« Last Edit: May 19, 2009, 10:24:00 AM by Kevlar83 »
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    -Edmund Burke

Somewhat cliche, but appropriate...

Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #5 on: May 19, 2009, 10:28:07 AM »
Perhaps we can have a board that is restricted to members who are new. That is, they can only start threads in there and no where else. They can post in other boards otherwise, just not start a thread until they get a certain post count.

This would serve two purposes: (1) regular members would know that certain threads are by potential drive-by posters and (2) the new member would be allowed to respond in other threads.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2009, 10:29:51 AM by Airyaman »
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Offline Kevlar83

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #6 on: May 19, 2009, 10:40:16 AM »
So they can say what they want as long as it's in the, "We know you're probably going to spewing BS that we don't want to hear about, or can refute without a thought, so you're restricted in starting a discussion in this one small corner until we know you're gonna be man enough to back up your testimonies, even though we initially invited you to the boards with open arms of understanding" section?

Seriously, am I the only one who's seeing how religious this is? (Again, low blow, but censorship REALLY makes me angry)

What would keep someone from posting test 20-30 times on a thread in a test forum just to get their say anywhere they want? Again, I've been a moderator, I've been an admin, I understand your frustrations and anger over this, but until the web page or forum rules say that there's a requirement of backing up your claims within a day of making them or the thread get deleted or something, I'm going to be very vocal about my opposition on this...

You cannot censor people or segregate them because they want to witness or make a testimony of their faith... Or (in my case) you haven't proven your worth to the forums...
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    -Edmund Burke

Somewhat cliche, but appropriate...

Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #7 on: May 19, 2009, 10:46:34 AM »
This is not censorship. You may think so, but it is not. I have come to detest the mail bag because of nonsense threads, I don't want to wade through them on other boards as well.
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Offline subtleinspiration

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2600
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #8 on: May 19, 2009, 10:47:37 AM »
Seriously, am I the only one who's seeing how religious this is? (Again, low blow, but censorship REALLY makes me angry)

This is a privately-run forum that can be handled the way that the admins/moderators or users want it to be. I'm not sure what the answer is, but I'm not against what has been suggested so far (especially a newbie-friendly section). I'm thinking specifically of Rmartel who started like five different topics and then everything got so scatterbrained before he finally dropped off the radar. We don't need that crap, really. It just hurts the conversation to have it going on betwixt five different threads and hopefully something can be done about it that will promote honest debate while derailing the people who just want to start shit.
"As a God fearing Christian,  you should never ever date an Atheist. One night alone with an atheist is enough for you to lose your faith and to be converted into one of the spiritually dead."

Offline Kevlar83

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #9 on: May 19, 2009, 11:02:07 AM »
Seriously, am I the only one who's seeing how religious this is? (Again, low blow, but censorship REALLY makes me angry)

This is a privately-run forum that can be handled the way that the admins/moderators or users want it to be.

I made the statement not to say what is right or wrong, but to say that we claim that the religious shut off what they don't want to hear, and this is the exact same thing. You don't want to hear unsubstantiated testimonies, so instead of ignoring them (which is something you could have easily done with Rmartel who thrives on the attention) you'd rather censor and/or segregate the POSSIBILITY of it happening. Also, I understand that many people might be asking why I fight so strongly against this. (C'mon its only 20 posts) I have been censored by people singing hymns before. I have been told to shut up just for asking questions. I refuse to let the demographic that I consider myself deeply entrenched in succumb to the idea of censorship in any form because someone won't follow through with their testimonies.

This will make this place no better than an evangelical church, only allowing the "elders" to start the conversations until the "children" can prove themselves worthy and trustworthy enough to make their opinions known in the general discussion and to hell with anyone outside trying to get in, especially if the only thing they have to say is what we ourselves invited them to say in the first place.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    -Edmund Burke

Somewhat cliche, but appropriate...

Offline Kevlar83

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #10 on: May 19, 2009, 11:07:23 AM »
This is not censorship. You may think so, but it is not. I have come to detest the mail bag because of nonsense threads, I don't want to wade through them on other boards as well.

You're saying that I shouldn't be able to say what I want where I want? Isn't that.... censorship? Also your suggestion is segregation.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    -Edmund Burke

Somewhat cliche, but appropriate...

Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #11 on: May 19, 2009, 11:07:50 AM »
You are missing the point entirely. This is not about censorship but manageability and providing a better service to regular members. We don't care that people make unsubstantiated claims (thats what religion does anyway) but I think many of us do care about people who sign up to start a thread then leave. It serves no purpose other than to clutter up the forum with useless threads. If a user is not willing to address responses to their threads, so be it, but brand new users should not have the ability to do so just to proselytize.
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #12 on: May 19, 2009, 11:09:24 AM »
This is not censorship. You may think so, but it is not. I have come to detest the mail bag because of nonsense threads, I don't want to wade through them on other boards as well.

You're saying that I shouldn't be able to say what I want where I want? Isn't that.... censorship? Also your suggestion is segregation.

No, they can say all they want, just not start useless threads until they have established that they are willing to be a productive member of the community. Would you allow someone to come to your place of business and be disruptive, while sitting back and doing nothing about it?
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #13 on: May 19, 2009, 11:11:29 AM »
This is not censorship. You may think so, but it is not. I have come to detest the mail bag because of nonsense threads, I don't want to wade through them on other boards as well.

You're saying that I shouldn't be able to say what I want where I want? Isn't that.... censorship? Also your suggestion is segregation.

Oh, and BTW, the "segregation" you speak of would not be based on religion, race, creed, etc. but simply being a non-established member. The new poster could be Christian, atheist, or Jedi. New is new.
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Offline CosmicScherzo

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 411
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • What would Jesus brew?
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #14 on: May 19, 2009, 11:17:21 AM »
We'd be happy to hear whatever they have to say as long as they're interested in sticking around and talking about it.  If someone is willing to go through the trouble of loading their post count on the test board, they're probably not a drive-by.

This isn't about keeping out lame arguments or fire-and-brimstone threats.  That's going to happen regardless.  This is just to keep from having to sift through a pile of posts from people who are never going to return and continue the conversation.

I joined the old forum about 2-1/2 years ago.  In all that time, including that one, this one, ATT, and IGI, I'd be surprised if I've started even 10 topics, yet I've never had the slightest problem getting my point across.
"What claim has your piety on my deference?"

Offline Kevlar83

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #15 on: May 19, 2009, 11:20:04 AM »
You're missing my point entirely. This isn't about the ease for the senior members, this is about the principles of an open forum and the need to keep from distancing ourselves from the ability of all to be able to have their say within it. All you have to do before clicking a thread is click the name of the OP. What's their post count? oh 1 or 2, then don't look at the thread and let it drain into oblivion. By demanding that new members need to prove themselves to you is a way of you saying you're better than them in this community, that your opinions are more valid than theirs because they don't have the post count. That might not be what you are trying to say, but if I could perceive it as such isn't it easy for others too.

Also, at the risk of sounding somewhat ad hominem:

This is not censorship. You may think so, but it is not.

How are you not having a patronizing tone with this. I found this offensive. It might not be censorship to you, and I respect your right to think so, but it gives you no right to talk to me like I'm some unruly schoolboy, so please stop assuming that I don't understand your point or that I have faulty perceptions of the issue...

This is not censorship. You may think so, but it is not. I have come to detest the mail bag because of nonsense threads, I don't want to wade through them on other boards as well.

You're saying that I shouldn't be able to say what I want where I want? Isn't that.... censorship? Also your suggestion is segregation.

Oh, and BTW, the "segregation" you speak of would not be based on religion, race, creed, etc. but simply being a non-established member. The new poster could be Christian, atheist, or Jedi. New is new.

New is a demographic that can be segregated against. It's ageism with post counts. Also, please STOP using the patronizing tone in your posts with me!
« Last Edit: May 19, 2009, 11:34:06 AM by Kevlar83 »
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    -Edmund Burke

Somewhat cliche, but appropriate...

Offline subtleinspiration

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2600
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #16 on: May 19, 2009, 11:26:05 AM »
New is a demographic that can be segregated against. It's ageism with post counts. Also, please STOP using the patronizing tone in your posts with me!

How about them there whole seventeen posts you got there, Kevlar83, ya newb.  ;D
"As a God fearing Christian,  you should never ever date an Atheist. One night alone with an atheist is enough for you to lose your faith and to be converted into one of the spiritually dead."

Offline Kevlar83

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #17 on: May 19, 2009, 11:26:58 AM »
New is a demographic that can be segregated against. It's ageism with post counts. Also, please STOP using the patronizing tone in your posts with me!

How about them there whole seventeen posts you got there, Kevlar83, ya newb.  ;D

LOL and proud of it! (18 now BOOYA!)
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    -Edmund Burke

Somewhat cliche, but appropriate...

Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #18 on: May 19, 2009, 11:36:56 AM »
You're missing my point entirely. This isn't about the ease for the senior members, this is about the principles of an open forum and the need to keep from distancing ourselves from the ability of all to be able to have their say within it. All you have to do before clicking a thread is click the name of the OP. What's their post count? oh 1 or 2, then don't look at the thread and let it drain into oblivion. By demanding that new members need to prove themselves to you is a way of you saying you're better than them in this community, that your opinions are more valid than theirs because they don't have the post count. That might not be what you are trying to say, but if I could perceive it as such isn't it easy for others too.

Odd, but you seem to be the only one fighting for this. Could it be that you have not truly experienced what it is I'm talking about? I've been on this board for some time, and believe me, the drive-by posters are a detriment to this board.

Quote
Also, at the risk of sounding somewhat ad homen:

This is not censorship. You may think so, but it is not.

How are you not having a patronizing tone with this. I found this offensive. It might not be censorship to you, and I respect your right to think so, but it gives you no right to talk to me like I'm some unruly schoolboy, so please stop assuming that I don't understand your point or that I have faulty perceptions of the issue...

Patronizing, my ass. You look to be someone with a very thin skin if the above words offend you. If that is the case, you will not do well here at all.

Quote
New is a demographic that can be segregated against. It's ageism with post counts. Also, please STOP using the patronizing tone in your posts with me!

Fuck off, how is that for patronizing? You are no better than theists on here who take offense where there is none.
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Offline Kevlar83

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #19 on: May 19, 2009, 11:44:39 AM »
You're missing my point entirely. This isn't about the ease for the senior members, this is about the principles of an open forum and the need to keep from distancing ourselves from the ability of all to be able to have their say within it. All you have to do before clicking a thread is click the name of the OP. What's their post count? oh 1 or 2, then don't look at the thread and let it drain into oblivion. By demanding that new members need to prove themselves to you is a way of you saying you're better than them in this community, that your opinions are more valid than theirs because they don't have the post count. That might not be what you are trying to say, but if I could perceive it as such isn't it easy for others too.

Odd, but you seem to be the only one fighting for this. Could it be that you have not truly experienced what it is I'm talking about? I've been on this board for some time, and believe me, the drive-by posters are a detriment to this board.

Quote
Also, at the risk of sounding somewhat ad homen:

This is not censorship. You may think so, but it is not.

How are you not having a patronizing tone with this. I found this offensive. It might not be censorship to you, and I respect your right to think so, but it gives you no right to talk to me like I'm some unruly schoolboy, so please stop assuming that I don't understand your point or that I have faulty perceptions of the issue...

Patronizing, my ass. You look to be someone with a very thin skin if the above words offend you. If that is the case, you will not do well here at all.

Quote
New is a demographic that can be segregated against. It's ageism with post counts. Also, please STOP using the patronizing tone in your posts with me!

f**k off, how is that for patronizing? You are no better than theists on here who take offense where there is none.

LOL who's being ad hominem now.  Seriously if you feel so shaky about your point that you feel attacking me is the best course of action, well, I just feel sorry for you then.

Get it through your head, you are not better than me, and I am not better than you. I advocate mere open discussion with all and the lack of a constraint that would be a contradiction to the original web page inviting people of faith to make a testimony (not a conversation) about their point of view.

And I requested you merely watch your tone because it makes you seem desperate or unsure in a debate. I could care less what you think of me. You're just another forum member on a power trip trying to squish the "newb" who has the audacity to question what you and your many many many posts has to say.

Get off your high horse please, it's embarrassing.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2009, 11:46:13 AM by Kevlar83 »
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    -Edmund Burke

Somewhat cliche, but appropriate...

Offline CosmicScherzo

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 411
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • What would Jesus brew?
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #20 on: May 19, 2009, 12:00:20 PM »
It's not about who's better, it's about who's interested in continuing the discussion.  Just think of it as a brief extension to the registration process.  Do you think it's censorship to require an e-mail address and username before being allowed to post?

Only a government can impose censorship.  Is it censorship to refuse a Jehovah's Witness entry into your house in order to witness to you?
"What claim has your piety on my deference?"

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 18290
  • Darwins +640/-134
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #21 on: May 19, 2009, 12:03:09 PM »
I hate to disagree with you, being a new member and all, but in my opinion nobody is forcing you to read the topics.

That's not the point. The point is a person just creating a topic, and then not participating in their own topic. What's the point in creating a topic if you're not going to answer any of the questions posed by other members in said topic when they ask questions to you? What's the point but for the person who created it to gather information for their own needs and yet doesn't care about the needs of those they pose such statements to and/or questions towards? That's trolling.

Quote
Also, nobody is forcing you to respond to rhetoric and propaganda.

Who said they were?

Quote
I might not have a lot of sway, and I might not be that well known in this community (yet), but taking away my ability to start a conversation on a topic I wish to talk about due to annoyance derived from another member, well its unfair to me.

Who's asking you not to start a topic? Not me. What I'm proposing is that if you start one, then you participate in it and not just by starting it. Did you read any of what I wrote, or are you just an idiot?

Quote
It's censorship in it's literal form. What if a college professor said that I couldn't make a comment within his or her class until I had written a few essay that had been graded so I know what that professor liked to hear? Also, what would keep new members from posting walls of text on other threads? On a further note, while I might be new to the community, I feel this place is a safe place to say what you think is right, regardless whether it jives well with the rest of the community or not.

This is a DISCUSSION FORUM -- that's the entire notion of this community. Yet, if one comes in, posts what they got to say, and then never comes back to their own topic, then that's not really discussing, is it? That's just people answering repeatedly to the OP, and the OP never responding back. It's just those who are responding discussing, and that makes the topic, at times, go off-topic.

Quote
Again, being a new member, I might not hold a lot of sway with my opinions, but instilling this would be a way of cause a level of elitism within the community, and there's no better way to make someone not feel welcome than saying that you have to prove yourself welcome to be here...

Bullshit.

Quote
just my 2 cents...

Which aren't worth anything.

-Nam
"presumptions are the bitch of all assumptions" -- me

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 18290
  • Darwins +640/-134
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #22 on: May 19, 2009, 12:08:23 PM »
Seriously, am I the only one who's seeing how religious this is? (Again, low blow, but censorship REALLY makes me angry)

This is a privately-run forum that can be handled the way that the admins/moderators or users want it to be.

I made the statement not to say what is right or wrong, but to say that we claim that the religious shut off what they don't want to hear, and this is the exact same thing. You don't want to hear unsubstantiated testimonies, so instead of ignoring them (which is something you could have easily done with Rmartel who thrives on the attention) you'd rather censor and/or segregate the POSSIBILITY of it happening. Also, I understand that many people might be asking why I fight so strongly against this. (C'mon its only 20 posts) I have been censored by people singing hymns before. I have been told to shut up just for asking questions. I refuse to let the demographic that I consider myself deeply entrenched in succumb to the idea of censorship in any form because someone won't follow through with their testimonies.

This will make this place no better than an evangelical church, only allowing the "elders" to start the conversations until the "children" can prove themselves worthy and trustworthy enough to make their opinions known in the general discussion and to hell with anyone outside trying to get in, especially if the only thing they have to say is what we ourselves invited them to say in the first place.

Testimonies are fine, make them in the Testimony section. But if you're going to create a topic in "Religious Discussion" yet never discuss anything, then, you're not really participating. This is a discussion forum -- not a Post your Testimony Forum.

-Nam
"presumptions are the bitch of all assumptions" -- me

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 18290
  • Darwins +640/-134
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #23 on: May 19, 2009, 12:16:33 PM »
You're missing my point entirely. This isn't about the ease for the senior members, this is about the principles of an open forum and the need to keep from distancing ourselves from the ability of all to be able to have their say within it. All you have to do before clicking a thread is click the name of the OP. What's their post count? oh 1 or 2, then don't look at the thread and let it drain into oblivion. By demanding that new members need to prove themselves to you is a way of you saying you're better than them in this community, that your opinions are more valid than theirs because they don't have the post count. That might not be what you are trying to say, but if I could perceive it as such isn't it easy for others too.

I belong to Funtrivia.com. New members aren't permitted to create quizzes 'til they have have taken 100 quizzes themselves. Is this website saying that newbies are beneath them? No, they found that if everyone was able to create a quiz then they'd get less quality quizzes, and also, with the staff that they have (though quite huge in of itself) that so many people entering so many quizzes at once just became an overwhelming to them; and many of them being of less quality (extreme grammatical errors etc.,). Are they on a high horse by limiting new members from creating quizzes because of this?

How is it any different here? The only limitation would be for new members not to be able to create a topic that is for discussion yet they do not participate in. And for current members to create a topic that they do not participate in. It's filtering out the trash from everything else. People will still be able to post their rhetoric as long as if they pose a question to members that they respond to it. Why ask a question in a discussion forum, in a discussion section, if you're not going to discuss the answers given?


-Nam
"presumptions are the bitch of all assumptions" -- me

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 18386
  • Darwins +446/-25
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #24 on: May 19, 2009, 12:35:00 PM »
I'm all for restricting new members for at least oh, a hundred or so posts before they can create new topics.  It's not like there are that many new topics to be created, you know?  How many do we need about the Ark or spag? 

If a new member can participate honestly then they have earned the right to create new topics until they abuse that right. 

This forum isn't *for* any particular person, theists or not. And I think that the participants have earned the right to determine what they want to deal with.   
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #25 on: May 19, 2009, 12:37:12 PM »
LOL who's being ad hominem now.  Seriously if you feel so shaky about your point that you feel attacking me is the best course of action, well, I just feel sorry for you then.

Shaky? I simply told you to fuck off so you could honestly have something to be offended at. The prior statements would only offend someone just looking to be offended.

Quote
Get it through your head, you are not better than me, and I am not better than you. I advocate mere open discussion with all and the lack of a constraint that would be a contradiction to the original web page inviting people of faith to make a testimony (not a conversation) about their point of view.

Where did you ever get the idea I was saying I'm better than you? You must be reading someone else's words, not mine.

Quote
And I requested you merely watch your tone because it makes you seem desperate or unsure in a debate. I could care less what you think of me. You're just another forum member on a power trip trying to squish the "newb" who has the audacity to question what you and your many many many posts has to say.

What tone? Again, you are finding offense where there is none. That is why I told you to fuck off, so at least you don't have to pretend to be offended.

Quote
Get off your high horse please, it's embarrassing.

What high horse? Seriously dude, you are going to get buried in this forum with your little sissy attitude.
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Offline Kevlar83

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #26 on: May 19, 2009, 12:43:33 PM »
Is it censorship to refuse a Jehovah's Witness entry into your house in order to witness to you?

If you have a sign on the front of your house saying "Please come in and tell us about your experience with god" its kinda messed up. But your house is different than an open forum isn't it. If they arrived at a collegian debate about religion, and they were invited in the first place, and were denied their say because they wouldn't back up their statements, then yes I would consider that censorship...


Testimonies are fine, make them in the Testimony section. But if you're going to create a topic in "Religious Discussion" yet never discuss anything, then, you're not really participating. This is a discussion forum -- not a Post your Testimony Forum.

-Nam

The problem with this is that its contradictory to the initial invitation. If its an issue of incorrect placement of the thread then the moderators have to be on the ball more. Don't take away the rights of many potential members for the aggravating actions of a few. That's total Bush-League tactics, and after 8 yrs of having to put up with it, the last place I wish to see it is in a supposedly free open forum of ideas...


Quote
That's not the point. The point is a person just creating a topic, and then not participating in their own topic. What's the point in creating a topic if you're not going to answer any of the questions posed by other members in said topic when they ask questions to you? What's the point but for the person who created it to gather information for their own needs and yet doesn't care about the needs of those they pose such statements to and/or questions towards? That's trolling.

Again that's the moderators faults not mine (as a new member)

Quote
Who said they were?

You did when you complained about it...

Quote
Who's asking you not to start a topic? Not me. What I'm proposing is that if you start one, then you participate in it and not just by starting it. Did you read any of what I wrote, or are you just an idiot?

You actualy advocated the restrictions of starting topics until a certain post count. I have stories to relate about persecution as an atheist, but at the time of my origianal post on this thread if what u proposed got implemented then I wouldn't have the right to share that until I met a certain criteria. You take away my ability to start a topic, so how can I participate? here's a snippet of what you said:
Quote
that we limit new members to making a specific amount of posts before being able to create a topic as a way to minimize drive-by members
Did you read any of what you wrote?

Quote
This is a DISCUSSION FORUM -- that's the entire notion of this community. Yet, if one comes in, posts what they got to say, and then never comes back to their own topic, then that's not really discussing, is it? That's just people answering repeatedly to the OP, and the OP never responding back. It's just those who are responding discussing, and that makes the topic, at times, go off-topic.

My point throughout this whole thing is that it's contradictory to the original invite, change the invite and I wont have a problem...

Quote
Bulls**t.

How? I can't get any time to testify to my city assembly board because I'm 25 and below a certain pay bracket. I usualy put at the bottom of their agenda... I sure as heck don't feel welcome there...


Quote
Which aren't worth anything.

Kinda uncalled for, but hey I wasn't trying to be a s**t kicker when I originally posted, I was (in my opinion) putting forth, what I felt, was a genuine concern of mine. I didn't attack you or say you were wrong, I merely let my opinion be heard. Which is really unfortunate that you take such a strong hostility to dissent when I'm not calling you wrong or evil. Maybe you're not used to it. You can't hide behind the "Oh look another (insert whatever here) being dumb". So instead I'm dealt and treated with ad hominem attacks and hostility.

I just feel sorry for a lot of you guys, and sad that you claim to be open and welcome but decide that if I'm not with you I'm against you. Just really sad.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    -Edmund Burke

Somewhat cliche, but appropriate...

Offline Kevlar83

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #27 on: May 19, 2009, 12:56:26 PM »
lol dude, do yourself a favor and stop ok, if me admitting you're right makes you stop putting forth this drivel then yes, I'm wrong restrict me to 50 posts before I can make a topic. You know what, let's make it 100 to make sure right nam, cause that's how Funtrivia.com does it?

Cmon you guys are kinda feeding off each other. Maybe you guys are friends and want to watch each others backs or so forth. But bullying on the new guy doesn't seem like the most constructive course of action.

Hey maybe that's why people don't follow up their posts... You call them idiots and silly and you make them feel like crap for saying what you originally asked for in the first place?

I really hope you guys kinda take a look at yourselves cause you guys are the worst kind of people (Nam and Airyaman) you 2 are the old lady from Hansel and Gretel. You have this cottage made of candy and you invite all inside, but when they come in you try to eat them.

I'm sad that you guys think that this is a constructive direction to take to the topic. You care more about discrediting me than finding out why I think or feel the way I do.

You guys are sad...

(BTW I know you guys are gonna throw all of this in my face, so flame away)
« Last Edit: May 19, 2009, 01:12:03 PM by Kevlar83 »
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    -Edmund Burke

Somewhat cliche, but appropriate...

Offline CosmicScherzo

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 411
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • What would Jesus brew?
Re: New Members Limited to Starting Topics
« Reply #28 on: May 19, 2009, 01:16:53 PM »
Is it censorship to refuse a Jehovah's Witness entry into your house in order to witness to you?

If you have a sign on the front of your house saying "Please come in and tell us about your experience with god" its kinda messed up. But your house is different than an open forum isn't it.

No, it isn't.  A house is private property, and this is a privately run forum.

If they arrived at a collegian debate about religion, and they were invited in the first place, and were denied their say because they wouldn't back up their statements, then yes I would consider that censorship...

Let me make this plain, because you appear to think we're advocating something we're not.

Nobody is calling for denying anyone's say.  They'd be free and welcome to jump into any thread they choose to, and even start their own in the Introduction and Testimony boards.  (I haven't seen any objections since I brought that up, anyway, which leads me to believe nobody so far has a problem with it.)

The behavior we're trying to keep in check is more akin to showing up to a debate on campus, starting your own debate on university property, and then bailing out.  It achieves nothing but disruption.

What keeps it from being censorship is that they are free to say whatever they wish, but we aren't required to provide the medium for them.

I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill.  Your participation on this thread alone would get you a good way toward whatever number might be chosen, since nobody is calling for a whole lot.

It's just like requiring a learner's permit before a driver's license, except the restrictions may only last a day.
"What claim has your piety on my deference?"