DePooperit Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 I'm not at all offended by views different from my own - which you might have picked up if you'd read my post. What I find out of order - not necessarily offensive - is the fact that the mods allow anti-religious signatures. A signature has a different status from a viewpoint. To me, anti-religious signatures are comparable to racist or sectarian graffiti, and their presence is a form of bullying. I wonder how many forums would allow them. Remembering that taking part in a forum is voluntary, most people with any religious belief will simply vote with their feet and do something else. This seems so obvious to me that I couldn't see any point in complaining to the mods. Nor do I refuse to engage with people whom I disagree with - as you might have noted in an anti-religious thread not that long ago. But when does opinion become prejudice? The thread I'm referring to wasn't called 'What do you think about religion' (there was already a thread about that) or even 'What do you think about religious beliefs' but 'Religious beliefs - should we respect them?' And before I chipped in, it seemed to me that the preponderance of opinion was that we should not. When you start making comments to the effect - as scoots did - that the Christian church are the biggest mass-murderers in recorded history, bar none, you are reducing a complicated historical question to the sort of rhetoric of which prejudice is born. So what's your point... **Mod edit - personal insult removed - let's keep things civil** I'm sure there must be a Latin phrase which, when unpacked into standard English, communicates the point that further comment is unnecessary as the point has been adequately demonstrated by the efforts of the opposition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DePooperit Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 On a positive note, I find the Shetland dialect section fascinating and very educational. Maybe it is. But most of it is still in English, mostly because many of the queries are from people outside of Shetland. Obviously if someone asks a question in standard English and they're obviously not from Shetland, you're going to reply in standard English. So there's a situation where, while you know you can post in the Shetland tongue in the Shetland section, most of the time you don't; and whether you can or not in the forum at large is a good question. But I return to the point which several people have mentioned. Anonymity is the real problem. I wonder how many of those who make comments about 'crap written in dialect' or 'Jesus freaks' or whatever would do so if everyone knew who they were. Well, maybe they would stick to the 'crap written in dialect' at least, because that's a pretty well accepted view of mainstream society. And anti religion is becoming so. Hmm - maybe lack of anonymity wouldn't solve as many problems as I thought... As for me, my name and address is: John M Tait5 Low StreetBanffAberdeenshireAB45 1AU Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOYAANISQATSI Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 I'm sure there must be a Latin phrase which, when unpacked into standard English, communicates the point that further comment is unnecessary as the point has been adequately demonstrated by the efforts of the opposition. Ave Satanas!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twerto Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 I think you missed an "l" out there Koyann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 I'm sure there must be a Latin phrase which, when unpacked into standard English, communicates the point that further comment is unnecessary as the point has been adequately demonstrated by the efforts of the opposition. disputandi pruritus ecclesiarum scabies, Possibly? Maybe not the exact phrase you were looking for but it fits non-the less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CyprusPluto Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 What I find interetsing is that 32 people have indicated that Shetlink is no longer of use, but they had to log in to be able to vote. Why bother logging in if it's no use? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stigli Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 Weel fok i joost tink your maakin a braa styooch oot o dis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biglad Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 I would like to see Shetlink evolve a bit further, start again and get rid of the pseudonyms and use members real names then people can be accountable for the sharn thats written here most of the time! IRONY!! Not that I'm suggesting you're slagging anyone Biglad, just that I doubt that's the name on your birth certificate.. Fair point though... Yes, I know but I will if you will! I try to post with a bit of common sense a load on here just use it to vent their frustrations hiding behind the keyboard. If everyone used their real names I bet you half the people on here wouldn't be as bold or as brash! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biglad Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 Actually just read the whole thread again, as usual some interesting debate then it just decends into farce thus enhancing my point above. If people find Shetlink genuinely informative and useful why not just start again in the same format and get everyone to re-register using their 'real names'? I know it won't weed out all the drivel that is written as you just have to look at the Shetland Times readers views section but at least it will make people think before they type! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 I know it won't weed out all the drivel that is written Oh come on... What could be more 'drivelous' than a forum about how rubbish the Shetlink forum has become in a Shetlink forum??! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fjool Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 I think there's a good argument in favour of requiring folk to post with their real names. However, enforcing this is almost impossible without getting people to register by sending a utility bill or such. If there's a good way to achieve this, I'm interested to hear. The second problem is that some topics are best served by folk being allowed to post anonymously and we'd loose a particular insight. Difficult one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 As a moderator, Surely you have the power to set up a 'Trotsky' style forum. Where all of the 'normal'/'serious' debaters can sign up voluntarily with there true identities. If you find out that someone has portrayed themselves as someone they are not.. Ban them and log the IP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DePooperit Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 I think there's a good argument in favour of requiring folk to post with their real names. However, enforcing this is almost impossible without getting people to register by sending a utility bill or such. If there's a good way to achieve this, I'm interested to hear. The second problem is that some topics are best served by folk being allowed to post anonymously and we'd loose a particular insight. Difficult one. Well, there's (at least) two possible stages - the first would involve only the mods knowing peoples' real names, and the second posting using only real names. Many forums allow posting under a pseudonym but require real names etc. (though I don't suppose many of them check up on them) for registration. That would allow anonymity for posting but still maybe make folk think twice about what they say. I would have thought that, in a place the size of Shetland, fake names and addresses would be more easily 'rumbled'. Wouldn't make it any easier in the case of posters from outwith, of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 By the way (mods)I think that you were a little rash with your decision to scrub the term 'Jesus freak'.Had the person I was addressing been an active member of the 'Jesus freak Evangelical movement' (look it up), they may have been upset that you chose not to recognise or allow their organisation a mention on your website. This, I know, is unlikely but it shows how your subconscious interpreted my remark to be a "personal insult" thus highlighting a discriminative element in you. An assumption that has shown you to be unfit to moderate on future religious debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twerto Posted December 20, 2011 Report Share Posted December 20, 2011 I think in the context that you wrote it, it was fairly obvious what your intention was and moderated correctly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.