Ask the Staff Anything About RF

[Revoltingest]

I don't find the distinction between "discussion" and "debate" to be all that clear in practice.

There's a clear difference.
Discussion is where no one says "Bull****!"

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Discussion is where no one says "Bull****!"

Civilised debate then.

 

[Revoltingest]

Civilised debate then.

To try to turn things from debate (which gets tedious & competitive), I'll ask questions...the kind which people want to answer.

 

[crossfire]

Oh, dear......I don't know any of those things.
I never even got certified as an atheist.

Luckily, there is a blurb about it in the Buddhism Overview Sticky in the Buddhism DIR (Under the Three Marks of Existence Section.) It should be displayed more prominently there, as those are the historical standards that the different schools of Buddhism have agreed upon on how you tell Buddhadharma from non-Buddhism. (There was some confusion when Buddha was proclaimed an Avatar of Vishnu, and Vaishnavism was spread under the guise of Buddhism. The Four Dharma Seals represent key elements of what Buddha taught, which would probably be opposed by non-Buddhadharma movements.)

 

[Revoltingest]

Luckily, there is a blurb about it in the Buddhism Overview Sticky in the Buddhism DIR (Under the Three Marks of Existence Section.) It should be displayed more prominently there, as those are the historical standards that the different schools of Buddhism have agreed upon on how you tell Buddhadharma from non-Buddhism. (There was some confusion when Buddha was proclaimed an Avatar of Vishnu, and Vaishnavism was spread under the guise of Buddhism. The Four Dharma Seals represent key elements of what Buddha taught, which would probably be opposed by non-Buddhadharma movements.)

I did read Siddhartha.
And I stayed awake thru the entire book!

 

[crossfire]

I think the difference would become quickly apparent. To me the no-debate rule for DIRs doesn't make a lot of sense and needs rethinking.

I still haven't got a clear sense of what DIRs are really for. What, essentially, is their purpose?

Actually, it serves as a safety measure against someone coming into the DIR and hijacking a discussion/information thread. An example of this can be found in the pinned Anatta thread in the Buddhism DIR.
There is the Same-Faith debate area for debates.

 

[Quagmire]

I think the difference would become quickly apparent. To me the no-debate rule for DIRs doesn't make a lot of sense and needs rethinking.

I can guarantee you that the people responsible for this rule have already done plenty of thinking about it.

And these are people who actually do understand what the DIRs are for.

II still haven't got a clear sense of what DIRs are really for.

Then you should ask.

What, essentially, is their purpose?

OK, thanks.

Well, there's a long answer to that that I don't have time for atm (maybe later if no one else chimes in) so I'll give you the short answer which is probably more to the point anyway:

The DIRs are here because there are times when people want to discuss their beliefs with people who have sincere questions and a genuine interest in knowing more about them, without having to deal with a lot of background noise from people who are just looking to challenge their right to exist in the first place.

 

[Quagmire]

That doesn't sound right to me. It would be nice to think that people were encouraged to explore other traditions on a forum like this.

They are. The problem is that too few people understand the difference between an exploration and an anal probe.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

The DIRs are here because there are times when people want to discuss their beliefs with people who have sincere questions and a genuine interest in knowing more about them, without having to deal with a lot of background noise from people who are just looking to challenge their right to exist in the first place.

I think it's usually pretty obvious when people are doing the latter, and surely mods can just remove the offending posts?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Actually, it serves as a safety measure against someone coming into the DIR and hijacking a discussion/information thread.

OK, but I think DIRs can cope with more than just discussion/information threads. I really don't see a problem with some healthy debate within DIRs, there is surely no need to be walking on eggshells all the time.

 

[psychoslice]

Are most staff here religious or are they mostly neutral, and if they are mostly religious, does that influence their job here ?.

 

[crossfire]

OK, but I think DIRs can cope with more than just discussion/information threads. I really don't see a problem with some healthy debate within DIRs, there is surely no need to be walking on eggshells all the time.

That is what the same faith debates area is for.

 

[crossfire]

Are most staff here religious or are they mostly neutral, and if they are mostly religious, does that influence their job here ?.

The staff covers the whole spectrum in this regard. We focus on the forum rules. At least 3 staff members have to agree to the enforcement of a rules violation. (Unless it is obviously a spambot.)

 

[crossfire]

I think it's usually pretty obvious when people are doing the latter, and surely mods can just remove the offending posts?

Actually, it is not always obvious to those who are not a member of that religion. With the requirement for staff consensus for deleting posts, it would be a bureaucratic nightmare. I think it is quite reasonable to expect members to be mindful of the forum rules, and to respect the right for different religions to hold their beliefs and to gather together to discuss them in peace.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

With the requirement for staff consensus for deleting posts, it would be a bureaucratic nightmare.

I didn't realise that, it sounds very cumbersome though. On the forums I've been involved with previously moderators have quite a lot of autonomy on issues like post deletion.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

That is what the same faith debates area is for.

I still don't see the problem with using DIRs for those, and the distinction between "discussion" and "debate" is often blurred and unpredictable anyway.

But anyway, maybe I should shut up now.

 

[Tarheeler]

I think the difference would become quickly apparent. To me the no-debate rule for DIRs doesn't make a lot of sense and needs rethinking.

I still haven't got a clear sense of what DIRs are really for. What, essentially, is their purpose?

The DIR's are set up for members of that specific religion to discuss topics between themselves and answer questions from people who not belong to that religion. They are essentially closed areas that outsiders are allowed to ask question in.

It allows Jews, for example, to discuss the the role of the Temple amongst ourselves without a Christian telling us that the Temple is obsolete due to Jesus or for us to answer a question about our prophets posed by a non-Jew without a Muslim interjecting that Mohammad was the final prophet.

Each religion with a significant population here (and quite a few with no population here) have a DIR set aside for them to use.

The majority of the forum is open to everyone and debate, questioning, challenging, and open discussion are both allowed and encouraged. The DIR's are spaces set aside for specific groups to converse without those things, and the Same-Faith Debate section is the place for us to argue amongst ourselves.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

The DIR's are spaces set aside for specific groups to converse without those things, and the Same-Faith Debate section is the place for us to argue amongst ourselves.

I do get the idea of DIRs as safe-spaces, however it does trouble me that debate isn't allowed. It also troubles me that members who don't self-identify as being part of a particular DIR don't feel welcome there.

 

[Tarheeler]

I do get the idea of DIRs as safe-spaces, however it does trouble me that debate isn't allowed. It also troubles me that members who don't self-identify as being part of a particular DIR don't feel welcome there.

I can't help you there. You're not the first person who hasn't liked it, and I'm sure you won't be the last.

The DIR's are designed to be safe havens for the members of the respective religions, and the history of the forum show it is both a needed and a benificial feature. You have the rest of the forum to play in.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I can't help you there. You're not the first person who hasn't liked it, and I'm sure you won't be the last.

This reminds me of an old British joke:
Customer in shop: Have you got so-and-so?
Shop-keeper: No, we don't get much demand for that....you're the fifth person who's asked about it today.

I'm really just trying to give you people some constructive feedback, maybe you could accept it gracefully instead of circling the wagons?