IS PRWE forum getting more Liberal and civil?

With the addition of some new blood and a great new moderator, (not kissing up, I always liked Steve) this section is getting down right bearable, don't ya think? I think we are witnessing a bit of a renaissance (sp.) that I am very pleased to finally see. Not that there isn't a sqaubble or two now and then but the decibel level has definitely decreased.
I also think that the politically Liberal element has made a strong comeback with the addition of new participants and some returning old ones. Anyone else see this change come about or are things pretty much the same as usual from your perspective?

 

I guess it depends on your definition of "liberal" and "civil." The decibel level has gone down, sure. But at what price? Aiden, for instance, is no longer able to express his political/religious beliefs about who is created more equal than whom -- and in the very forum designed for such expressions. This was done, as DeOrc said, because some people may find it offensive. True. But EVERY political or religious belief will be offensive to someone, somewhere. Personally, I would have preferred to have the rules limited to "no ad hominems -- don't attack the person, just attack the opinion/arguement."

It would have still allowed the "dims/rethugs" type rhetoric (because it attacks the ideology not the person) but would still prevent the childish, "Oh yeah? Well you're a retard and my god can beat up your god" type nonsense.

A healthy society will always have vigorous debates. An unhealthy society will always limit debate to the "acceptable" points-of-view.

But its not my forum. I do not make the rules.

On the other hand, if by "civil" you mean less hostile, then, no. There's just as much animosity as before. Its just repressed.

If by "liberal" you mean broad-minded; tolerant, then, no. It has become less tolerant of conflicting ideas.

It depends entirely on your definitions.

From The American Heritage Dictionary ©1983
Civil adj. 1. Of a citizen or citizens. 2. Of ordinary community life, as distinct from the military or ecclesiastical. 3. Civilized. 4. Polite.
Liberal adj. 1. Generous in amount or in giving. 2. Approximate; loose. 3. Of or relating to the cultivation of general knowledge and the humanities: the liberal arts. 4. Broad-minded; tolerant. 5. Favoring civil liberties, democratic reforms, and the use of public resources to promote social progress. --n. One holding liberal political or cultural views.

It could be said that by making it more civil (polite) it has been made less liberal (tolerant).

<Thanks, Bone. That's much more readable.>

 

Alright. Anybody want to tell me how to get the html tags to work? My bold and italics didn't take.

 

Try [ ] instead of < > The American Heritage Dictionary. Oh, I just consider the source as far as civil posts or otherwise go... You really cannot expect an insane individual to act sane, but sane people stoop to insane levels daily...

 

This board uses BBCode

http://www.phpbb.com/community/faq.php?mode=bbcode

 

Its a double edged sword. The civility is good. But, as much as I dislike some of Aiden's posts, the fact that he's no longer able to make them seems kinda wrong. Then again, I haven't seen much of jw lately, which is great.

 

The more homogeneous a political forum becomes, the more boring and pointless it becomes. And the more any remaining opposing views are shouted down. I haven't seen a huge tipping point here yet but that is a big reason why I left another coin site's debates forum.

Civility is nice. However, over-catering to paper thin skin or too easily offended sensitivities can have a similar effect to the above. Again, I haven't seen that but I wonder about what has been done about Aiden as I don't know the story.

 

All good points...I did say "politically Liberal" hence the capital "L". I was saying that it seems like more Liberal views have been expressed lately over the more Conservative crowd that usually dominates.

 

He has been warned several times about his posts. Nothing serious, but it seems he's no longer able to express his radical beleifs here anymore.

 

Ok, now I need to know how you define "politically Liberal." (Geez, if I keep this up I'll need the definition of "is.") Me, personally, I define it to include the afforementioned tolerance.
I consider myself to be a liberal. I'm one of those who is offended by the term "sub-human." But I see the person expressing that belief as human -- and therefore a created-equal. Liberty is nothing if not the freedom of thought and expression of thought. If I alienate someone from their ability to express their thoughts then, all men be created equal, I alienate all men from the same. To me to be politically liberal, then, must be to defend the rights of all -- equally. Yet, until this thread, I've seen no one question, complain, or otherwise about the new rule. All I've noticed is people using the rule as a hammer to bludgeon others with. It doesn't seem more politically liberal to me. Thus my inquiry of your definition of "politically Liberal."

Sorry for the confusion. I'm just not entirely certain what you're asking.

 

There seems to be some misunderstanding based on the posts in this thread. Nobody, and that includes Aidan, has been forbidden from speaking their mind or stating their opinion on any subject. What has been forbidden is the use of foul language, racist terminology, name calling and personal attacks.

Now, if you folks are not capable of expressing your opinions and points of view, no matter what they be, without resorting to the above - then you are not as intelligent as I thought you all were.

 

I am no liberal on many issues.My opposition to the idea of homosexuality being regarded as normal has its root right there in the Bible,as is my opposition to the bigots from the Cult of Rome,especially the Hell-bound edited Pope of Rome.

You should take out the good book & you will find the truth about these matters in there.

Aidan.

 

I for one thank you for that.

 

I support everyone's right to express any view, but we all know it does get to insulting around here (at least it used to). I think the change is for the better. I mean if the best argument a guy can muster is "you are an idiot" he does not have much to say.

 

Well Aidan, let's teach by excample. As you can see, it only requires a little effort to speak your mind, get your point across, and yet do so in a civil manner.

 

Doug,it has been proven that the Pope of Rome IS still a Nazi.A lot of Anglicans can't stand the Hell-bound Antichrist.

Aidan.

 

Sounds like more than reasonable codes of conduct to me.

 

Aidan if that is what you choose to believe, fine. It really doesn't surprise me. However, you will refrain from expressing yourself in such a manner. At least here you will.

 

There is recent evidence that Hitler tried to kidnap the pope during WWII. the RC church may not be your cup of tea but they were never associated with the Nazi party. As for the current pope and his early childhood, you know as well as I do that German youth at the time did not have a choice, they had to join that evil Hitler youth nonsense.

 

Danr,Pope Pius XII of Rome was not innocent at all.He allowed the Vatican City to be used as a conduit through which the Nazis shipped guns & money to Mussolini's regime.Furthermore,the Nazi war criminals that escaped to South America were allowed to escape,thanks to the Vatican City's refusal to co-operate with the Allies after World War II.

I wouldn't be too surprised if the Vatican City is still financing Sinn Fein/I.R.A.'s mass murder campaign,considering the fact that both Gerry Adams & Martin McGuinness are murderers themselves.

Aidan.