How to deal with flaming., page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 2-4-2005 @ 04:12 PM by WyrdeOne
Originally posted by alien
For some - they seem to have the mentality of "Meh - I'll take the Warn in order to say something unacceptable to this person, what do I care, I have 4 more chances yet". Well...nah...not going to happen. I for ne will be banning without Warns, without consultation, without listening to excuses. Play nice or get out of the sandpit...can't find your way out of the sandpit, no problem, I'll help you.


These people do exist, in signifigant numbers. I applaud your stand on this issue. People even go so far as to flaunt their warnings, as a status symbol. That's more than a little childish. So, indeed, out of the sand pit.

I will continue to do my best to refrain from insults and below-the-belt attacks, and I hope the smoking trails of more and more ATSers falling from the sky will warn off potential trouble makers in the future.

Of course, Seekerof's suggestion to lower the warn/ban threshold has merit as well, and I would even go far as to advocate three strikes, you're out law. Two warns, third brings the hammer down.

I don't think a zero tolerance policy towards flaming is warranted, but hate speech definitely should be dealt with harshly. There is an incredible, sobering, amount of racism on the web, and necessarily on this site. I think it needs to be quashed if it violates hate speech law, that is, any speech intended to injure or incite others to cause injury.

Saying you don't agree with someone, saying they're not accurately perceiving the facts, that sort of debate has a place I think. If it gets too heated, by all means, warns are in order. But I think the REAL problem lies with people who use this board to spread a message of intolerance.

Also, intent is a very big factor, and should be used to determine appropriate action. If someone jumps on a thread and starts jabbering about how all jews are evil, money grubbing, satan worshippers, that's obviously hate speech, because it's intended to injure and incite others to hate. If someone points out something A jew has done, or the Jewish state of Israel has done, that's not hateful in general. Again, it's all in the intent.

I think the mods have a pretty well developed troll-dar, and I have confidence they'll make good decisions even if the rules become more strict.

There was one member I remember, who came on, and on his first or second post said all Gypsies are thiefs and liars, it was hateful and ignorant. They received a couple of warns for their behavior, and since then, their behavior has improved somewhat - even if their opinions are just as deplorable. So there is something to be said for 'training' the trolls to play nice.

[edit on 2-4-2005 by WyrdeOne]


reply posted on 2-4-2005 @ 04:13 PM by SomewhereinBetween
I read most of that thread and saw nothing new when it comes to expressing views on posts of objectionable content. I am no fan of organised religion, this is no secret, and at the top of my religious list is the RCC and consequently the papacy. However, JPII is face to face with his maker learning whether or not the doctrine and dogma he embraced during all of his 84 years was in fact God’s truth. As he became incapable of performing his duties, I was satisfied that this day of reckoning was nigh and therefore refrained from assaulting his constitution. However, his being near death did not require that his usual detractors find reverence for him, for in my opinion if a person is not respected when s/he is up and walking and all they way to their death-bed, there is no reason to suddenly find respect for them while they lay in it.

What I read from the originating post and others is a distinct intolerance for the stating of any opinion that is not pro-Christian at any time. The language used to mark anti-Christian views is that it is hateful, which obviously sends the message that to have an opposing view is to be harbouring hate and there can therefore be no truth to the opposing view since it is couched in words of malice.

From what I see on ATS as of late, Relentless’ view, and those who share it, is winning, for the speed at which Religious topics dealing with Christianity is being moved to BTS is blinding. I could have proven my case simply by just starting a thread with this post.

Relentless’ message has been heard and his/her wish being implemented in a manner which I liken to sending a child to his room because the parents cannot tolerate precocious behaviour. If it is done often enough the child will just conform and fall in line, shut up or never leave his room. I get the impression it is more important, palatable and intellectually stimulating to be advancing theories about short, slimy, grey shape-shifting lizards as running the world so as to give the story conspiracy credibility than to discuss global issues that have been contentious and heated for millenia.

It seems to me that the ignorance in the motto has actually taking on very definitive meanings: deny Muslims; deny Jews; deny non-Christians; deny Wicca; deny Islam; deny atheism; deny Liberals; deny gays…etc. The most contentious and malicious threads I see on this site are those attacking the Islamic faith, yet I cannot help but notice the utmost grace with which the likes of Babloyi and Tomcat Ha respond never once crying foul.

Perhaps the object of ATS is to spawn discussion for only those on the same side of the fence.

Now my post here will be viewed in one of two ways: it is either a flame to those who take it as such, or, it is my honest opinion on what I see happening.

I also ask alien: what actions constitute trolling?
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^