View Thread

Atheists Today » Easy Reading » The Rant Room
Who is here? 1 guest(s)
 Print Thread
The purpose
RayvenAlandria
The purpose of this forum is to allow people to vent. If you are having a heated exchange in another fora and the fight is distracting and derailing the thread, I might just ask you to go to the Rant Room and duke it out.

If the arguing parties move the exchange to this area, they will not be moderated unless things get to the point of death threats or the like. Other than that, bitch away.

If one party comes here to vent and the other does not want to continue the argument, the subject needs to be dropped. I don't want this area to be abused and become an outlet for people to bash on those who aren't wanting to bicker. Also, please attempt to stick to the subject that you are arguing about. I don't want to see "I hate so-and-so" posts.
 
seeker
Certainly a 'discussion' in this section should not carry over outside of this section
 
Bob of QF
May I suggest an additional rule?

That posts reflect the opinion, and not the person?

That is: if you're going to criticize something, criticize the opinion or viewpoint-- don't criticize the person.

If you post your opinion, say as such: "in my opinion...." or "I think that..." or "It is my belief that..." and so forth.

This helps to avoid absolute statements, which is often what leads to the thrashing in the first place.


Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
comfortable
From Monty Python:
Q: WHAT DO YOU WANT?
M: Well, I was told outside that...
Q: Don't give me that, you snotty-faced heap of parrot droppings!
M: What?
Q: Shut your festering gob, you tit! Your type really makes me puke, you vacuous, coffee-nosed, maloderous, pervert!!!
M: Look, I CAME HERE FOR AN ARGUMENT, I'm not going to just stand...!!
Q: OH, oh I'm sorry, but this is abuse.
M: Oh, I see, well, that explains it.
Q: Ah yes, you want room 12A, Just along the corridor.
M: Oh, Thank you very much. Sorry.
Q: Not at all.
M: Thank You.
(Under his breath) Stupid git!!


So how do I piss someone off so that we wind up here?

Perhaps there's another thread where members are claiming no connection between invading Iraq and oil?

My own wife has recently said "You always....", and she's my best friend. Little hope of expecting others to be calm, rational, and avoiding hyperbole.
Edited by comfortable on 08/10/2008 11:59
.
The fewer the facts, the stronger the opinion.
.
Men are sheep in credulity, but wolves for conformity.
 
Skeeve
I can only assume Eric Idle and John Cleese were involved in that skit, if not, at least they are in my head, lol.Smile
"The world is my country, and do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine
 
RayvenAlandria
In the other forums, I hope that members will adhere to etiquette and not get personal when they disagree, but if they do spiral down into a catfight, this is the place I wanted to send them to. If y'all want, we could always make another forum for the REALLY heated fights where people are calling each other names and acting stupid. Maybe we'll call it "The Cage" or something. LOL Perhaps the Rant Room should be for off the wall rants, and the cage should be for actual fights between members?

My idea was to have a section where people could fight if they wanted to. Not that I encourage that kind of fighting, but IF people are wanting to do so, I feel they should be allowed to. I always hated newsgroups that moderated heavily and treated members like preschoolers. Ive been to newsgroups who had such strict rules about how members could disagree that normal conversation became impossible. You couldn't say anything that even remotely came across as "rude" or you'd get edited.

I know an "anything goes" area might be abused, but it's worth giving it a shot. If it doesn't work out we can always delete the section. I doubt it would be used much, at least not until the membership grows pretty large and we start having clashes. I can't imagine anyone here now even having a need to go to *The Cage* to duke it out, but the future could be different. I wanted to be prepared in case we grow and some discussions get too heated for the normal fora. If people start calling each other names, I can tell them to go duke it out and come back when they get it out of their system. If they both desire to fight, off they go to the cage and have at it until they wear themselves out. If one of them doesn't want to continue the fight, I can tell the other person to drop it.
 
Skeeve
Great idea! I'm off to make it happen Grin
"The world is my country, and do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine
 
seeker
I have been involved in my share of 'cage matches', usually with either a fundie of JDHURF (insert fundie joke here). A cage section would be a good idea
 
catman
The only problem I see with that is that often, while one of the people involved will consider it a fight to the death, the other will still be hanging on to some shred of moderation. Distinguishing between rants and cage matches will be difficult. I had a famous (or infamous) one with JDHURF myself.
"If I owned both Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas." - General Sheridan
 
Bob of QF
catman wrote:
The only problem I see with that is that often, while one of the people involved will consider it a fight to the death, the other will still be hanging on to some shred of moderation. Distinguishing between rants and cage matches will be difficult. I had a famous (or infamous) one with JDHURF myself.


JDHURF?

I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with that one...
Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
schmoo
He's an atheist, but the type you're not always quite sure you want on your side. Bit over the top, and gets pretty huffy and pretty nasty fairly quickly if you decline to agree with him on every point he makes. He has no use for people of more moderate temperment, and has at one time or another pretty much gotten furious with every regular at the old atheist dot com site over some point of contention.
 
seeker
I liked JD, he was very intelligent and great with fundies but then I was also more than happy to bash him as hard as he bashed me. On an unmoderated forum, which atheists.com was for most of its existance, it made sense to be thick skinned. When the forum changed JD didn't.
 
schmoo
I liked him too, believe it or not-I admire someone that believes very strongly in something. What I don't admire is when someone gets nasty about it and treats others like they're complete morons if they don't agree-in that he's just as fundie as the most mental of Christians.
 
seeker
That was the one thing that disappointed me when we went to a moderated forum on the old site. I know I'm not necessarily the king of moderation but even I knew that it was time to change styles a little.
 
schmoo
huh...to be honest I really didn't pay that much attention. I don't even remember any debate over becoming a moderated forum, though I'm sure there must have been and I may have even participated in discussing it. I just don't remember! It's just been one thing after another here at home and I simply haven't had the energy to keep track of things elsewhere.
 
Bob of QF
schmoo wrote:
He's an atheist, but the type you're not always quite sure you want on your side. Bit over the top, and gets pretty huffy and pretty nasty fairly quickly if you decline to agree with him on every point he makes. He has no use for people of more moderate temperment, and has at one time or another pretty much gotten furious with every regular at the old atheist dot com site over some point of contention.


Ahh, okay. I thought it was an acronym like "ROFL" or something.

My bad! <heh>

I've met some of those sorts here and there.

I call'em zealots. And zealots sometimes bother me, regardless of what they are zealous about.

I try to stay away from the very edges of anything. Comes from being a half-century old, I suppose.
Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
catman
Bob of QF wrote:Ahh, okay. I thought it was an acronym like "ROFL" or something.

I couldn't help smiling when I read that. I'm sure JDHURF would be mightily pleased.

I actually liked him too. He was very bright, but very set in his ways, especially in the political area. As long as I agreed with him, which was most of the time, we got along fine. But when I dared to draw different conclusions from one of his links, he felt that I had insulted him personally.
"If I owned both Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas." - General Sheridan
 
neilmarr
I disagree with everything so far posted in this section of the site. You are all cads, bounders and curs. Up yours. Neil
 
catman
Thank you. I really appreciate it!!!Smile
"If I owned both Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas." - General Sheridan
 
seeker
Well Neil, if you are going to be that way then have at you. You cod! You flounder!
 
Jump to Forum: