Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Atheists & Agnostics

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

gcomeau

(5,764 posts)
Mon Apr 1, 2013, 05:05 PM Apr 2013

Can we talk about the group rules? [View all]

A couple things are bugging me, wondering if it's just me or if this applies to anyone else.

1. The "safe haven" aspect of this group.

Although anyone is welcome to participate, the DU Atheists and Agnostics Group is a place where atheists and agnostics can engage in frank discussions about the effects of religion on politics, free of debate about the existence of a deity or deities.


Am I the only one who has always felt that the way that's defined is just a little... off for this particular group of people? I think it's safe to say the majority of atheists are atheists in no small part due to a respect for principles of skeptical inquiry, and generally we have no particular great need to be "protected" from people challenging our positions. Rather the opposite, bring it on. I'm all for an area where we can't be blatantly trolled or constantly mindlessly evangelized or anything and if that's where the safe haven protections extended and then ended that would seem about right... but no challenging the premise of the non existence of a deity? Really? Isn't that more the kind of environment that those with dogmas they can't rationally defend need to cocoon themselves in?


2. The whole Interfaith Group issue

Any and all discussion of the Interfaith group is prohibited in original posts and replies to original posts... ... Please respect the safe-haven nature of the Interfaith group, even if you don't agree at all with what they're discussing.


Can someone explain to me how posting *outside* a group can possibly constitute a breach of their safe haven? Would they not also have to be *outside* that haven to read any such posts and thus, one would think, having no reasonable expectation to be sheltered by it? Since when did the establishment of a safe haven group suddenly create posting restrictions about the subject on *the rest of the board outside that group*?

(Please note how I am not discussing the interfaith group or anything occurring inside it, but rather the rule in this forum that applies to it. I don't read that group, don't visit it, and have no particular intention nor inclination to post about it... but the fact that such a rule exists here in this group is jarring.)

75 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
*sigh* JNelson6563 Apr 2013 #1
Ahem.. gcomeau Apr 2013 #5
Did you want to bitch about the Interfaith Group? JNelson6563 Apr 2013 #8
Did you read the OP before replying? gcomeau Apr 2013 #9
Oh my! JNelson6563 Apr 2013 #10
Wow, you have a serious issue paying attention. gcomeau Apr 2013 #15
lolz Ok. JNelson6563 Apr 2013 #22
Sheesh... gcomeau Apr 2013 #26
The A&A group is "protected" from religious debate because sometimes posters just want to vent, ZombieHorde Apr 2013 #2
Thank you. I've never been to Interfaith Warpy Apr 2013 #4
I guess I'm missing the part... gcomeau Apr 2013 #16
If they know they are being ridiculed by "outsiders," then their posts are less "safe." ZombieHorde Apr 2013 #32
Exactly. We get to blow off steam here, and say things that get us in trouble elsewhere on DU. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #18
Here is where I go for arguments... awoke_in_2003 Apr 2013 #74
Faith-based Policies Mad Maddie Apr 2013 #73
Yeah, if I wanted to discuss magic sky fairies, I'd go to the Religion group. Apophis Apr 2013 #3
I am happy with and agree with both of these rules kdmorris Apr 2013 #6
I certainly don't see it as "adhering to a dogma". gcomeau Apr 2013 #19
"do you really think that would have carried on as an enduring topic" kdmorris Apr 2013 #28
There's a Men's group? gcomeau Apr 2013 #29
"Speaking as a man, that seems... pointless." Iggo Apr 2013 #42
^^This^^ nt mr blur Apr 2013 #40
May I add that there has been enough trolling and bad blood... TreasonousBastard Apr 2013 #7
Thanks for weighing in. JNelson6563 Apr 2013 #12
You're welcome... TreasonousBastard Apr 2013 #20
I and, apparently many others agree. JNelson6563 Apr 2013 #24
As a host of the Interfaith Group, what was it that got me blocked? cleanhippie Apr 2013 #57
Kentauros explained it quite well already... TreasonousBastard Apr 2013 #60
If a group is open to non-believers, as the SoP says it is, then the viewpoint of the non-believer cleanhippie Apr 2013 #67
While we're on the subject skepticscott Apr 2013 #11
Some cannot help themselves Scott. JNelson6563 Apr 2013 #13
As noted below, I do like to know what's being said elsewhere skepticscott Apr 2013 #30
I'm with you! JNelson6563 Apr 2013 #31
But isn't saying skepticscott Apr 2013 #34
Valid point! JNelson6563 Apr 2013 #35
I never could understand that... awoke_in_2003 Apr 2013 #75
DU's forums are open and visible to the public. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #21
I do skepticscott Apr 2013 #25
It would appear that... rexcat Apr 2013 #51
I most certainly have, and... TreasonousBastard Apr 2013 #61
You said troll... rexcat Apr 2013 #63
My presence is not appreciated? Yes, I will leave you alone. TreasonousBastard Apr 2013 #64
The purpose of the interfaith group was to created a spot theists only Gore1FL Apr 2013 #14
Like I said... gcomeau Apr 2013 #17
It has been explained thoroughly by several. JNelson6563 Apr 2013 #23
If you're referring to your "explanations" gcomeau Apr 2013 #27
Thew interfaith group was explicitly supported by members of A&A Gore1FL Apr 2013 #36
Good grief. gcomeau Apr 2013 #41
I read it Gore1FL Apr 2013 #44
Sigh... gcomeau Apr 2013 #45
My interp is this: Gore1FL Apr 2013 #46
Thud. gcomeau Apr 2013 #47
I am sorry, but I am not understanding your criticism. Gore1FL Apr 2013 #49
No, the problem is not universal. gcomeau Apr 2013 #50
I would recommend you be satisfied with those answerrs then Gore1FL Apr 2013 #72
There was already a group where non-believers would not go. Interfaith was to be for all of us... cleanhippie Apr 2013 #58
We supported one. Gore1FL Apr 2013 #59
I cannot answer better than kdmorris did. Curmudgeoness Apr 2013 #33
Yes, I get that I am in the minority. gcomeau Apr 2013 #43
Yup. Curmudgeoness Apr 2013 #53
The only thing the "rules" stop you (or anyone) from posting about Goblinmonger Apr 2013 #55
Try actually reading the group rules, then we'll talk. -eom gcomeau Apr 2013 #62
I don't know what you want Goblinmonger Apr 2013 #65
Then explain the bold gcomeau Apr 2013 #66
I'm sure you aren't going to really listen, but here goes. Goblinmonger Apr 2013 #68
Ok gcomeau Apr 2013 #69
My initial thought Goblinmonger Apr 2013 #70
My guess is you're right... gcomeau Apr 2013 #71
Well I think the new rulez are stifling. Warren Stupidity Apr 2013 #37
Yeah, I get that. Iggo Apr 2013 #48
DU is rapidly becoming cleansed of any possibility of a good old fashioned food fight. Warren Stupidity Apr 2013 #52
You're right. Iggo Apr 2013 #54
Religion is open for food fights. Goblinmonger Apr 2013 #56
I believe ChairmanAgnostic Apr 2013 #38
when you are in the minority... awoke_in_2003 Apr 2013 #39
Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»Atheists & Agnostics»Can we talk about the gro...»Reply #0