(03-29-2017, 03:22 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: that awkward moment when 3 of the top 4 posters can't post in this sub forum.

(07-07-2017, 09:21 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Serious question on this, because I think this is a fine line. Ignorance is just a lack of knowledge on a subject. A lot of opinions on the topics we discuss here often come from a place of ignorance and so it can be difficult to not insinuate that. I say this because I only consider ignorance as something to be overcome with more knowledge and not something as inherently negative. I just want to get some clarification on that ahead of time.

(07-07-2017, 10:00 PM)Dill Wrote: My two cents, hoping I understood your point, Bels.

I agree with your take on the concept of "ignorance."  And people who don't know a subject may take great umbrage if, however obliquely, your response to a post reveals their lack of knowledge.

If I understand Zona, however, the mods aren't out to create "safe spaces" for sensitive posters. Rather, they don't want us to call one another "ignorant" and otherwise engage in personal invective.  When that happens, the term is not descriptive but a species of name calling and destroys dialogue. They may also look askance at designating groups with that term, especially if the poster knows that someone he is addressing belongs to that group. E.g., "Democrats and Bengals fans are ignorant."

If someone posted an erroneous account of Quangos, and you could not respectfully correct it via explanation and supporting links for fear the poster might think you "condescending," then meaningful discussion of politics and religion would not be possible. That would concede the field to "ignorance."  I doubt the mods want that. 
 

(07-07-2017, 10:41 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Dang, whatever it was, it looks like GMDino and StLucie ate the hammer for it.

(07-08-2017, 01:06 AM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Luckily for me, I am all knowing and love everyone equally.  

Can't we all just get along FOLKS!   Just take everyone's hate speach with a grain of whatever regionally appropriate salt (sea, Mediterranean, deer) fits in your pea shooter.  

Thanks for the update moderatos.  Me love you long time.

(07-08-2017, 11:51 AM)xxlt Wrote: Deer salt? Really? Damn, gotta show my ignorance AGAIN! Is that extracted from deer urine? Or did you mean like a big salt lick to attract deer (bloody hell, I can't believe I didn't think of that sooner)? Something else?

(07-08-2017, 12:33 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Take it with a grain of deer salt xx.

(07-08-2017, 11:48 AM)xxlt Wrote: Just an observation. And maybe an incorrect one. But it seems one of those ate said hammer before and then was resurrected. Not the first time I have observed this phenomenon. Is "banned" a status some people display even though they aren't? I think I even remember seeing posts that were new an hour after I seen "banned" as a status for the same poster. I mean, part of me is like, whatever, who cares, but part of me is like is this part of post truth? Does banned not mean banned any more? Can you be unbanned? I honestly find it, not distressing, but confusing. And chances are because I am ignorant - clearly so in this area - that I am the only one confused, but perhaps not.

(07-08-2017, 12:49 PM)Benton Wrote: Temporary suspensions show the user as banned.

Restricted refers to posters unable to post in certain forums.

We also have a warning system, although it doesn't get used as often. Normally folks around here go straight from civilized straight to batshit crazy or outright offending and they get suspended, banned or restricted depending on what happened. Every instance is looked at individual with the coc as a roadmap for how we handle a situation .

(07-08-2017, 12:49 PM)Benton Wrote: Temporary suspensions show the user as banned.

Restricted refers to posters unable to post in certain forums.

We also have a warning system, although it doesn't get used as often. Normally folks around here go straight from civilized straight to batshit crazy or outright offending and they get suspended, banned or restricted depending on what happened. Every instance is looked at individual with the coc as a roadmap for how we handle a situation .

(07-08-2017, 12:25 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: The problem is not being ignorant. I am ignorant of many things in life. The problem is stating that someone else is ignorant in order to denigrate and degrade them. 

(07-08-2017, 03:10 PM)Stewy Wrote: I have several times called people ignorant in geology threads, in the direct definition of the word because............they were.  I usually provide multitudes of links and information and tell them to educate themselves (usually one particular poster).

I would say that if used correctly ignorance is never negative because it can be fixed.  Providing information to fix ignorance is a public service.

If someone calls another person ignorant, but means stupid, that doesn't make the word ignorance wrong, it was just used incorrectly.  Let's not put a red flag on the use of the word ignorance.  Let's put a red flag on it's mis-use.

(07-08-2017, 03:10 PM)Stewy Wrote: I have several times called people ignorant in geology threads, in the direct definition of the word because............they were.  I usually provide multitudes of links and information and tell them to educate themselves (usually one particular poster).

I would say that if used correctly ignorance is never negative because it can be fixed.  Providing information to fix ignorance is a public service.

If someone calls another person ignorant, but means stupid, that doesn't make the word ignorance wrong, it was just used incorrectly.  Let's not put a red flag on the use of the word ignorance.  Let's put a red flag on it's mis-use.

(07-08-2017, 02:58 PM)Stewy Wrote: This is not criticism, but a suggestion.

You might want to make some kind of.....difference in "title" between perma-Banned and Suspended.  it might save a lot of confusion and hostility from those who have been calling the Admis Ban-Crazy or Hair-Trigger or whatever.  Maybe you don 't care, but your explanation, while greatly appreciated, might not have been necessary if Suspended and Banned existed as different titles.

(07-08-2017, 02:58 PM)Stewy Wrote: This is not criticism, but a suggestion.

You might want to make some kind of.....difference in "title" between perma-Banned and Suspended.  it might save a lot of confusion and hostility from those who have been calling the Admis Ban-Crazy or Hair-Trigger or whatever.  Maybe you don 't care, but your explanation, while greatly appreciated, might not have been necessary if Suspended and Banned existed as different titles.

(07-10-2017, 12:48 AM)Benton Wrote: While we're all talking about decorum and things that will lead to suspensions, I would encourage everyone NOT to post from fake news sites. No, this isn't up for debate or part of any discussion on what constitutes "fake news." These sites — the variety you find on social media with outlandish stories like "What every home owner is doing to get their MORTGAGE PAID OFF by Congress!" or "Congressman admits to eating baby hearts" — are generally all fake. And full of viruses.

They are not welcome here. They will be deleted. If a poster continues posting links to garbage sites, they will be suspended for trolling.

So I am guessing you are using the professional journalists' definition of "fake news," and not Trump's. 

(07-10-2017, 03:24 PM)Dill Wrote: So I am guessing you are using the professional journalists' definition of "fake news," and not Trump's. 

Forum activity would slow down considerably if we could not post links from the CNN and the NYT.

(07-10-2017, 03:35 PM)Benton Wrote: More or less.

The staff isn't likely going to track down every odd ball site our there, and we aren't going to use it as a way to discourage sites like TheBlaze, Brietbart, HuffPo, Slate, etc., that are outside of "main stream media." But if you link to a site containing malware — as many of the "Congressman found in bed with Loch Ness" type sites are — then we will delete the thread. That holds true for any area of this board.

And if a poster shows that much disregard for fellow board members on a regular basis, they will be banned.

(07-10-2017, 03:52 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Aww, man. I was hoping that we could at least encourage using more reputable right and left leaning sites like The Weekly Standard and the Nation.

I gues sit would be difficult, though, since some have a hard time recognizing bias, or seeing it when it isn't there as much as they'd like it to be.