What's the deal??

I've seen a lot of threads in the Religion/Spiritually section with titles saying things such as, " Only for Christians. No atheists!", Or "Atheist only. No Christians, or theists". I just don't understand. Why are we banning each other from our discussions? First of all, telling a person not to do something that is as silly as that is offensive in itself. Secondly, it's like sending out an invitation for atheists or Christians, or agnostics (or whoever you don't want in the discussion) to come right in with their opinions, or flames or whatever. Why can't we be sensible? Arguing in a way that is intelligent is a good thing, especially in dealing with things like religion because it helps to pin the holes in a faulty argument. Are people too sensitive to allow others to point out things like that to them? What's the point of discussion, if you're only going to agree with other people that think exactly the same way as you, and convince yourself that your belief is the only right one? I thought, that discussions were supposed to allow people to open their minds, and let thoughts in that they may never have considered. So, what's the deal here, people? Can someone enlighten me? Forgive me for posting this in the extended discussion section, but I really think that this is Extended material. If it needs to be moved, be my guest, guys. :)

Maybe they're not looking for the opinions of fellow Christians/atheists etc. and they don't want anyone else's opinions? Like something related to the life of Jesus or something, and they don't want atheists butting in with comments or arguments. Even if the argument has merit, they may not want to discuss it on their thread. But I agree, they're just putting out a welcome mat for whoever they asked to stay away to come and post.

I don't think there is a single topic in All of R/S that is longer than 10 posts where not a single atheist has posted in. So it doesn't really matter. Christians will also posts in 'Atheists only' topics. It's lame, but who cares.

People will post where ever they want.

Those post "restrictions" are, as said earlier, an invitation to flame. Not that avoid those will lessen the flamewars in that forum :D. Really, that comes with the territory though. I have yet to see a religious forum NOT have flamewars.

In general, it's well-documented in online social dynamics literature that the social systems that succeed are those that are adaptable to how people use them. If you try to impose something, people will lose interest. For instance, if facebook decided that "The wall is for one-time hellos and stuff" and tried to enforce it, people would be unhappy. Instead, when they saw people use it more conversationally, they went and made it easier to do so ("wall-to-wall" and all that). [note: that example was contrived, I don't actually know how wall started out hehe, but you get the gist of my point].

I guess what I'm trying to say is, those threads are like a failed portion of the overall ecosystem that is DV, and they will naturally die out. But, like I said, the flamewars are here to stay. And given how active the RS forum is, I'd say it's good to have it around, just to keep the other discussion areas more civil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by webmaster

Maybe they're not looking for the opinions of fellow Christians/atheists etc. and they don't want anyone else's opinions? Like something related to the life of Jesus or something, and they don't want atheists butting in with comments or arguments. Even if the argument has merit, they may not want to discuss it on their thread. But I agree, they're just putting out a welcome mat for whoever they asked to stay away to come and post.

---

I think it's mighty sad that people actually want to surround themselves with 'yes' people just so they don't have to argue or think. How inspired.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Replicon

Those post "restrictions" are, as said earlier, an invitation to flame. Not that avoid those will lessen the flamewars in that forum :D. Really, that comes with the territory though. I have yet to see a religious forum NOT have flamewars.

In general, it's well-documented in online social dynamics literature that the social systems that succeed are those that are adaptable to how people use them. If you try to impose something, people will lose interest. For instance, if facebook decided that "The wall is for one-time hellos and stuff" and tried to enforce it, people would be unhappy. Instead, when they saw people use it more conversationally, they went and made it easier to do so ("wall-to-wall" and all that). [note: that example was contrived, I don't actually know how wall started out hehe, but you get the gist of my point].

I guess what I'm trying to say is, those threads are like a failed portion of the overall ecosystem that is DV, and they will naturally die out. But, like I said, the flamewars are here to stay. And given how active the RS forum is, I'd say it's good to have it around, just to keep the other discussion areas more civil.

---

I suppose that you're mostly right. It sucks that R&S has to be that way, though. It would be great for an intelligent discussion to take place there.

I think the thread starter sets the pace (at least for the first page). I've seen some really intelligent discussion go on over there. I've also seen (and admitedly been part of) less intelligent stuff.

I do admit, once in a blue moon, a great topic will be brought up, but most of them are plagued with flamers and trolls trying to piss people off....It just seems childish.

makes sense to me if people want to hear the oppinions of only atheists, or only fellow theist, I mean it's perfectly ok to do that, it gives more orginised descussion amonge fellow beleivers and usualy the other sides answer is ovious if it wasn't ovious then the other side would be interested and invite them in to the discussion. (yeah I can't spell ovious but I'm sick of not using that word)