All new philosophy and religion section open!

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Ever since 2006, SFN has longed to have its philosophy and religion section back. We closed P&R because of the tension and anger that flowed through the forum, but now we're bring it back, with new rules and new ideas to keep discussions going strong. It's an experiment, however, so the forums are subject to change. If we discover they should be rearranged, or removed altogether, we'll willingly do so. Your feedback and your cooperation in keeping them going well are welcome.

 

Head over to look!

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=162

 

The rules are simple, and designed to prevent the heated discussions that destroyed our previous forums. All members with more than 100 posts and three weeks of membership are eligible to join in the fun, and we have just three simple rules:

1. Never make it personal.
   


1. Disagreements about beliefs should never be in the form of attacks on the believers. This isn't a place to air grievances. Civility and respect towards other members are needed here even more than elsewhere on SFN, even when you disagree.
   
2. Disagreements about beliefs should never be interpreted as attacks on the believers, even when they are. If you can't handle having your beliefs questioned, you don't belong here. If you feel insulted, that does not excuse you from rule 1.a.
   

[*]Don't use attacks on evolution, the big bang theory, or any other widely acknowledged scientific staple as a means of proving religious matters. Using scientific reasoning is fine, but there are certain religious questions that science cannot answer for you.

[*]Do not post if you have already determined that nothing can change your views. This is a forum for discussion, not lectures or debates.

 

Now, go and be philosophical!

Edited March 2, 2010 by Cap'n Refsmmat

[bascule]

Wow, how did I notice the Earth Science forum but not that?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

We have lowered the requirements for entry to Philosophy and Ethics to those of Politics -- thirty posts and ten days of membership. The Religion requirements will stay at 100 posts for now, although we will consider lowering them in the future.

[the tree]

We have lowered the requirements for entry to Philosophy and Ethics to those of Politics -- thirty posts and ten days of membership. The Religion requirements will stay at 100 posts for now, although we will consider lowering them in the future.

So long as there is some restriction - that should prevent people registering primarily to post in the non-science boards, although maybe there'd be something to be said for keeping the policy consistent.

[Rickdog]

Being restrictive in order to exclude those who you don`t want to participate in any given issue its O.K.,..... but......, by being excesively restrictive you also have a big chance to exclude out of the talk those who can really teach you in that given issue, specially when that person doesnt have any interest at all in the other topics existent in the forum.

 

Exclussion is like knife without handle, so you can use it to cut, but you also have the risk of cutting yourself in the process.

[StringJunky]

Being restrictive in order to exclude those who you don`t want to participate in any given issue its O.K.,..... but......, by being excesively restrictive you also have a big chance to exclude out of the talk those who can really teach you in that given issue, specially when that person doesnt have any interest at all in the other topics existent in the forum.

 

Exclussion is like knife without handle, so you can use it to cut, but you also have the risk of cutting yourself in the process.

 

I think the site needs to have this policy like this. There are plenty of sites of a purely Philosophical/Religious/Ethics nature for people to go to.

 

Discussion in these areas on this site should be really discussed by people with a scientific bias/interest and viewed from that perspective so that there is some discipline consistent with the rest of this forum.

 

If they allow people that do not have this general interest in science it would most likely cause insurmountable problems with those that do.

 

I think this filter of 100 posts is necessary to keep the purely religious that have no scientific interest or attitude away.

 

Those 3 extra sub fora are like nice little extras for people with a scientific leaning to venture into as required and I don't think they are intended to be the mainstay of the site populated by people with no primary interest in science.

 

One could argue, of course, that having a more relaxed policy towards entry in these fora would attract purely religious types who might then become enlightened to the scientific process and that would be great but it's an extremely risky strategy in my opinion...my gut feeling says it wouldn't work.

 

A high required post count forces a new poster to familiarise themselves with the methods and attitudes that are required on this site before they can engage in that type of discussion on this site.

 

That's how I see it.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Being restrictive in order to exclude those who you don`t want to participate in any given issue its O.K.,..... but......, by being excesively restrictive you also have a big chance to exclude out of the talk those who can really teach you in that given issue, specially when that person doesnt have any interest at all in the other topics existent in the forum.

 

Exclussion is like knife without handle, so you can use it to cut, but you also have the risk of cutting yourself in the process.

 

Again, this is an experiment, and we'll consider lowering the requirements in the future.

[Rickdog]

.......A high required post count forces a new poster to familiarise themselves with the methods and attitudes that are required on this site before they can engage in that type of discussion on this site.

That's how I see it.

 

Or how I see it......, It also is a form to stimulate some of those guys who really don´t have any concern in any scientific debate, but only are interested in these topics in particular. So in order to be able to participate in them, start a politic of posting anything, even non interesting posts in very interesting ones to the majority of us, who hazards or literally destroy any given issue, just in order to raise their post numbers to be able to participate where they wanted in the first place. I`ve seen this attitude before in other forums, and francly it is very disturbing, and also I `ve seen how some of these people create threads, for the only purpose to raise their post numbers.

 

Anyhow, in this case, I simply expressed a personal opinion about the issue, and its not inttended to change any given policy about it, or else I would have posted it in the last topic of the forum, where you can express suggestions for the best ideals of how this forum should work better. Its simply an opinion.

[StringJunky]

Or how I see it......, It also is a form to stimulate some of those guys who really don´t have any concern in any scientific debate, but only are interested in these topics in particular. So in order to be able to participate in them, start a politic of posting anything, even non interesting posts in very interesting ones to the majority of us, who hazards or literally destroy any given issue, just in order to raise their post numbers to be able to participate where they wanted in the first place. I`ve seen this attitude before in other forums, and francly it is very disturbing, and also I `ve seen how some of these people create threads, for the only purpose to raise their post numbers.

 

Anyhow, in this case, I simply expressed a personal opinion about the issue, and its not inttended to change any given policy about it, or else I would have posted it in the last topic of the forum, where you can express suggestions for the best ideals of how this forum should work better. Its simply an opinion.

 

That's a good point you raise and I'm sure the Mods will be mindful of this negative strategy if they come across it.

 

My post was not intended to challenge you...only share my viewpoint as a contrast. The more data points the Mods have the better they can make this forum and hopefully pre empt any problems that may arise...like you've just contributed in you last post. Amongst all the expressed opinions a balance lies.

 

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

We've come across some of that already, and I'm not fond of it. We'll try to stop the obvious cases. For example, mods can still give negative reputation, and you have to have positive reputation to be allowed in to Religion (as well as the post restrictions), so we can give negative rep for spamming and the person would have to earn their way to access through getting positive reputation.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

The forums are now open to all those with more than 50 posts, rather than 100 as before.

[Charlatan]

My next post - fifity one - wil be in there!

[ecoli]

My next post - fifity one - wil be in there!

 

I'm terrified