Request for revision and clarification of forum rules in the philosophy sections of the forum.

[MSC]

Quote

1. We expect arguments to be made in good faith. Honest discussions, backed up by evidence when necessary. Example of tactics that are not in good faith include misrepresentation, arguments based on distraction, attempts to omit or ignore information, advancing an ideology or agenda at the expense of the science being discussed, general appeals to science being flawed or dogmatic, conspiracies, and trolling.

This rule here for example; as it is written, it is a good rule for the hard science sections but even when arguing in good faith in say the ethics or philosophy forum, what exactly is considered evidence in those fields?

How could the rule be copied but reformatted for the sections where although science is a part of the fields in question, it is not the only part? 

I am making this request out of sincere desire to understand exactly how the staff here want the rules of engagement within these forums to be interpreted as recent arguments, misunderstandings and hurt feelings are probably being caused by these sorts of confusions. 

As it is, it seems even quoting a moderator from a past moderation is being deemed as abusive behaviour. 

I don't think anyone here wants to feel responsible for discouraging individuals from taking part in the forum but that is currently what is happening at times. 

So how can we fix things if no one is willing to address this, offer apologies where they are due or not directly insult members who are making sincere attempts to obey the rules and guidelines of the forum as they are written?

I do enjoy my time here when everyone is being respectful, peaceful and everyone is viewed as equally worthy of basic respect. I'd prefer not to feel forced to leave because the rules or staff do not allow for inclusion of people who, through no fault of their own, find the rules ill suited to parts of the forum where they are hard to apply or easily interpret. 

I apologise to the moderators for the upset I have caused with them, I would appreciate a reciprocal apology as it takes two sides to argue. I summarily reject the narrative where they are choosing to believe I am a bad and unethical person that should not be spoken to in a respectful manner. It's very closed minded and being closed minded is behavior I know and have observed them being capable of not being. 

I understand we are all here voluntarily, that should not be a good reason as to why it's allowable to throw insults and accusations peoples way, then justifying it by how the person reacts to the insults and accusations. We are all people first, we are not the screens we all see and we are all here for the same reasons. Why is that not enough to resolve conflicts we are all equally responsible for?

I'd ask and suggest this directly and not air this publicly, however I do not trust that I won't simply be banned for sending another message to request this and I'd rather not be ganged up on by three different moderators again without witnesses. Just for trying to be a direct, and helpful member of this community, who would at the very least like their good intentions to be acknowledged and recognised.