The Study

I'm sorry to hear that this is the case. I'm not familiar with the reporting process, having never reported anyone, nor having been reported on -- to my knowledge. A politics/issues forum, as someone noted above, can be a pressure valve to keep other forums on track. However, emotions do fray, and members of any forum can become habitually combative and go looking for a fight.
Basically, you click on this icon
report.gif
to report a problem post.
 
Thanks Bob. I would love to see a return to civility. I love a heated debate, but hate it when it turns personal.

To users, just remember to take a bit of time to cool off. I've often had to simply ignore certain users. Not worth raising the stress level. No offense Bob, but this board is not worth an early heart attack :)

Shesulsa, Thanks for the bullet points :asian:
 
Everyone has their own opinion. Its normal to disagree with someone else. But, its the manner that one goes about, in that disagreement, that can make or break the thread. If someone can't disagree in a civil fashion, without having to resort to personal shots, and childish behavior, then the study or any debate really, is not for that person.
 
Thanks Bob. I would love to see a return to civility. I love a heated debate, but hate it when it turns personal.

To users, just remember to take a bit of time to cool off. I've often had to simply ignore certain users. Not worth raising the stress level. No offense Bob, but this board is not worth an early heart attack :)

Shesulsa, Thanks for the bullet points :asian:
None taken. :) I tell that to the mods here often. I am rather proud of MT, but, it is just a web site.
 
Intellectual debate is great but when you go over the line it simply is not so great. One of the biggest issues we have here is people sniping or using personal attacks. When you debate your point do not make it personal. Really it is that easy.
icon6.gif
 
Assuming we're not talking outright trollery, the problem is that a lot of times what people are posting are their fundamental values and moral, ethical and political commitments, disguised as specific issues or abstract talking points. Poke a little bit below the surface of the discussion and you find the posters themselves, their basic identities in some sense. When you criticize someone's ideas, in principle you're criticizing just a set of claims and suppositions about the way the world works, a set that is simply one possible way things might be, independent of any particular believer in those claims. But in practice, people often identify with those beliefs to such an extent that any challenge to the belief is perceived as an attack on the believer.

It's not just in the Martial Talk Study you see this... in my own field, for example, people hold strong commitments to ridiculously abstract concepts, things you'd think couldn't possibly be taken as crucial to their sense of self, and self-worth. But in practice, they defend those beliefs like mother tigers, and will try to draw blood as soon as you start subjecting them to too much scrutiny. The venom and vindictiveness that emerges in academic debate sometimes is... well, scary. No name-calling or personal insults, but you can read the hostility and contempt between the disputants in every line.

If people realized that they themselves can't be reduced to their beliefs, and that even if they're wrong about something, it doesn't diminish their human worth, it would make things much easier, in all parts of life.... but we're just not built that way. That's why we need rules of conduct for this sort of thing...
 
Exile has an excellent point here, many people strongly associate their beliefs with their sense of self worth. When you attack someone's beliefs, they take it as a personal assault.

On the same note, many people feel that anyone with a certain set of beliefs, must be an enemy or unworthy of debate.
 
Bob et al.,

Is it just me Ā– perhaps my warped perspective - but does this board now seem quicker (faster end user response times) since The Study was closed a few days ago??

Anyway whatever the pending changes, perhaps you may want to think about having another six-day moratorium with The Study Ā– three days before/after the coming Election Day, November 4, 2008.

Get in some sleep cycles before typing our opinions away.
Then again we are all adults.
:angel:
 
The Study was the section of the boards I participated in the most, mainly because I don't practice martial arts, though I hope to be able to someday, but also because I honestly enjoy reading other's perspectives on world events, even if I don't agree with them.

Thus, I hope The Study is reopened, and while I don't think I made any posts which lead to it being closed, but if I did, please allow me to apologize. If it's reopened, I'll be extra careful to keep things civil.

So...here's to the reopening of the Study. :cheers:
 
Exile has an excellent point here, many people strongly associate their beliefs with their sense of self worth. When you attack someone's beliefs, they take it as a personal assault.

On the same note, many people feel that anyone with a certain set of beliefs, must be an enemy or unworthy of debate.

I think this is a very valid point. I know that I have strong reactions when generalizations are made about different groups or belief systems.
 
I think this is a very valid point. I know that I have strong reactions when generalizations are made about different groups or belief systems.

Strong reactions are understandable, it's the way those reactions are expressed that's the issue.
 
The Study was the section of the boards I participated in the most, mainly because I don't practice martial arts, though I hope to be able to someday, but also because I honestly enjoy reading other's perspectives on world events, even if I don't agree with them.
It seemed to be friendlier all 'round before people/groups of people started trying to control what anyone who disagreed with them said via anon rep dings.
 
It seemed to be friendlier all 'round before people/groups of people started trying to control what anyone who disagreed with them said via anon rep dings.

I ignore anonymous rep dings completely. If you're unwilling to back up what you say with your identity, it's not worth the time it takes to read. It's also why I signed all mine, positive, negative, or neutral.
 
It seemed to be friendlier all 'round before people/groups of people started trying to control what anyone who disagreed with them said via anon rep dings.
rep comments, pms, and emails sent through this site are all subject to our Terms of Service. Report the abusive ones, and we'll have Lisa unleash the Chews of Hell on em. ;)
 
rep comments, pms, and emails sent through this site are all subject to our Terms of Service. Report the abusive ones, and we'll have Lisa unleash the Chews of Hell on em. ;)

I would do it with pleasure...and maybe a nice chianti ;)


Even made a new avatar just for the occasion. :D
 
If kicking a few out by their groins makes it a better section for the other 99% of this sites members who want to read and post there, then so be it.
Someone's been training again. :lol: ;)

If people realized that they themselves can't be reduced to their beliefs, and that even if they're wrong about something, it doesn't diminish their human worth, it would make things much easier, in all parts of life.... but we're just not built that way. That's why we need rules of conduct for this sort of thing...
A bit of wisdom to kick start my Monday morning. :asian:

Even made a new avatar just for the occasion. :D
Yeah, what's up wit dat, Lisa? You're sometimes downright scary. But I guess that's the point, eh? :D :bangahead:
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top