PPR Rules/Etiquette

Post Reply New Topic

So a few times in the last week or so, I've ended up sort of speaking for PPR over in the WP.net discussion forum. What kept coming up was what I refer to as PPR etiquette, the sort of unwritten rules of this forum, and how they tend to make this place tough for new members to dive into. I certainly wasn't trying to become the spokesman for the forum or anything to that effect, but I felt that someone needed to make the case for how this place works relatively well as is, how things that might need the mods in other forums get taken care of in house, things of that nature.

Anyway, it was suggested to me that it was perhaps expecting too much of members of an Autism board to pick up on unwritten rules and customs, so I thought I'd enlist the aid of the forum to attempt to put together a blueprint for a sticky thread to show new posters the ropes here. I'm not going to presume to speak for the forum, so I'm going to put up some suggestions of what I think the unwritten rules look like, and hopefully other regular posters here will add their contributions, corrections, suggestions, etc. The poll questions are just what I thought up off the top of my head; pick the one you think is most important as a forum guideline. The rankings will be helpful in figuring out what's important to forum participants, and hopefully will spark some ideas for ones that I missed.

Feel free to PM me with suggestions if you don't want to debate them in the open thread, or just to offer advice or what not, I'm not wedded to any of these ideas so go ahead and trash them, suggest better ones, etc. Same thing if you feel you're better equipped to correlate the results into a coherent statement about the forum, take a crack at it, I don't even care if the final sticky post has my name on it or not, I just don't want people that don't "get" this place convincing the mods that it needs a good pounding to keep it in line. Right now, the only sticky threads in here are threats and warnings, with any luck we can get the particularly ill thought out "read and take to heart" one replaced with something that's actually useful.

ProPeR rules topic

Many of these rules are already posted as stickies, Dox. I have not gotten upset in PPR since April 2008, when I was attacked by two Ayn Randies who were very much into the selfish gene. I have learned that such people are too cut and dried to debate, and I was foolish enough to engage them in something that would be impossible for them to even consider. As it is, they do not post here at WP any more.

I like all of the above.

I think less mature posters just don't know how to take things in stride. Admittedly, I had a little trouble getting started in PPR, but it's grown on me.

Do I have my convictions that I'll unabashedly share in PPR? Sure, and I'll never stop for as long as I'm allowed to. I'd hate to see the hard-hitting style of many PPR occupants go in favor of less mature, thinner-skinned n00bs less interested in contributing to dialogue and more about trying to PROVE something--typically only really proving how smart they THINK they are.

I won't go line-by-line on the "rules," but here are my thoughts on some of them--

Don't take things personally. That can't be stressed enough. Too many responses are made based on emotion and not actual thought. I'm prone myself to getting upset on certain issues and immediately set out to create an eloquent, end-of-discussion response, but I find I stay on point much better by letting some comments go and reasoning out what the REAL point is. It's easy to get distracted, and discussions are much more productive when one maintains a cool head under a perceived attack. Too often we think an attack on an idea is an attack on the person. Such need not always be the case.

No sacred cows. I like that. Even though I'm firm about what I believe, it does me no good if my views go unchallenged. Likewise, those who believe differently than I do ought to find intellectual and spiritual growth through such challenges. Don't be satisfied in only knowing WHAT you think or feel, but WHY. You may feel offended, but perhaps you are offended because either: 1) You should reconsider your position, or 2) You should spend a little time figuring out what the holes are in your views and figure out how to harmonize seemingly contradictory ideas. Sadly, it seems very few people are actually willing to do this.

Keep it civil. Also something I'd like to see more often in PPR. I've grown accustomed to PPR discourse, but we do seem prone to going on the attack. One thing I noticed soon after I started posting in PPR was how quickly certain among us resorted to demeaning insinuations obviously intended to elicit and emotional response from an opponent. Now, on the one hand, perhaps it's a n00b mistake to fall for it. But on the other hand, those underhanded distraction tactics don't really serve any positive purpose, and perhaps we really could live without them.

Don't spam the forum. There aren't many who do this, but even just one person is annoying enough.

No free pass. That's been discussed.

Don't provoke the Strident Atheists! Ah! But here we have an idea that gets a free pass. By all means, PROVOKE 'EM!! !! Certain atheists/agnostics I know how to talk to. Knowing the vulnerabilities in atheist rhetoric can be fun for weeks of forum exploitation. However, apparent conflicts and contradictions exist in one form or another in all world views, including that of the atheists. Regarding the most strident of them, provoke away. But be warned that you get what you're asking for in this forum, sometimes even MORE than you want. In dealing with such people, or even ardent Christians such as myself, refer to the other rules as how to proceed (don't take things personally, keep it civil, no free pass).

I must say that me ego is loving the fact that my use of the adjective "strident" has had such a lasting influence on WP forum culture.

Don't provoke the strident atheists = No creationism, no god(s), no bibles, no supernatural stuff, and all be fine

Actually, I don't know what Dox means by that.

How can you provoke an atheist?
By making arguments that makes no sense and considered irrational and terribly absurd, and keep going with it?

IF that is so, then perhaps they can be "provoked" by that, the ones who despise questional assertions, and expect a rational construct, at least, On the other thand, I don't think any atheist should feel undermined nor provoked of anything, unless you threaten their lives and freedom based on a belief that cannot be empirical proved, then it should be a reason for being upset, even you would be upset for religious notions you don't agree with, and if you happen to suffer the consequences from them (ie extremist Islam, Jehova's Witnesses' blood transfer prohibition) other than that, I don't think they should feel like that, because atheists should know that the burden of proof is NOT from them anyway. So before than anything else, that is actually an advantage from their side.


I don't know what contradictions you refer to, in atheism, contradictions don't seem to exist, a lack of belief in deities, is just that, and there is no contradiction in there.


Undermine their freedoms, rights and lives through the government based on "God told me so", and accuse them of "evil communists", that is the only way I can think of, you can actually provoke and irritate atheists.

Last edited by greenblue on 19 Sep 2010, 11:17 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Perhaps it would be better to say this:

Fair Warning: Uttering supernatural nonsense around Strident Atheists will not be good for your ego. Your claims will suffer the utmost critical thinking imaginable. Conversational intolerance like you've never seen out of the sciences will emerge and the best in logically sound rhetoric will be employed to tear apart your claims. You have been warned.

lol

There is a huge difference between "logical sounding" and "logically sound."

I agree with all of them, aside from the bit about not provoking the strident atheists.

Evidence please?

One thing though: the typical PPR "unwritten rules" have usually included a lack of patience with outright racists, conspiracy nuts, and similar types of incurably irrational folks. It seems like lately the forum has been completely overrun by racists, when previously such people would generally have been chased off the forum.

The Strident Atheists answer was only half serious; I was aiming for "don't be surprised by the response when you provoke a large group here", but I could have been more clear about that. I was thinking of the people who come in here to "challenge" the religious to "prove" their views, or alternately the occasional theist that challenges the atheists to explain THIS thing or concede that their must be a god. Those never end well...

This autophenonological report is evidence enough!



It's great to see that I'm not alone or paranoid here. I can't help but notice there is so much far-right ultranationalistic lunacy going around here and only a few people are countering it. My recent up-swing in debunking rightwing BS isn't so much motivated by some attempt to damage members (as Dox47 seems to think) as it is by a sense of revulsion over unchallenged rightwing BS ("Obama was elected president 'cause of Affirmative Action", "Whites are oppressed in this predominantly White Country", "Democrats are forcing a socialist agenda on us", "Glenn Beck is a voice of truth", or "the numerous rightwing extremists who post inflamatory threads on WP against immigrants, African American Democrats, the poor, civil rights organizations, etc. are being oppressed by liberals!" ). The persecution complex of people who are spreading rightwing memes virally over this site just outright annoys me.

I suppose it's not terribly surprising that there is a rise in right-wing extremism in the first years of the Obama administration, and they have always had a persecution complex, but the degree to which the situation has escalated, both here on WP and in the "real" political world, is very disturbing. The next Congress will either be total gridlock or, if Obama accedes to the GOP-dominated legislature, a complete disaster. If the far right remains strong up to 2012 and manages to elect a Palin or similar candidate, the US is going to be in a world of trouble.

I'm predicting that the Tea Partisans will gain control of both Houses by huge majorities come the midterms. Voter turnout will be pretty low (which is typical when the GOP gets majorities - look at the Republican Revolution). The GOP will push for austerity measures, Obama will concede. The Tea Partisan GOP will run Clinton style investigations into the President's Office and go to far, ensuring that in 2012 Obama is reelected and their majorities are somewhat reduced. The US will face a second dip.

I've heard some forecasts that they can't win a Senate majority anymore. They've sacrificed one too many primaries to unelectable far-right loons.

But if the Obama administration ends up being more or less a repeat of the Clinton administration, that is an acceptable outcome. The Clinton administration was probably the best we've had since Eisenhower.

A lot of US economic success during the Clinton era was based on bubbles and Clitnon's financial industry reforms pretty much shifted the US towards being a permanent bubble economy (Dot Com Bubble replaced by Housing bubble). Slick Willie has his share of responsibility for this financial disaster.

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean people AREN'T out to get you.