A dedicated forum founded by Mateusz Skutnik, creator of world famous Submachine and several acclaimed point-and-click flash games.
https://www.pastelland.net/forum/
I don't understand.Boingo wrote:Ethics, effectively.
I still don't see any really good reason why we cannot procrastinate in the procrastination threads.
Thank yougemini wrote:And this is exactly why we discouraged debates on the old forum. Such topics like sexuality and religion. Because it would devolve into nothing but people being offensive and slanderous by calling each other "cowards" and others getting their feelings hurt and attacking back.
The flame war with JackO comes to mind...
Heck, we even had a debate about new members posting spam on the forum and that divided the forum into an event known as the great pastel forum war.
That is the issue with debates, that they often turn into conflicts and our community history has shown that...
And in regards to maturity, I think most of you are mature. But its alright to sit back and be a kid again here, in your off topic and randomness topics. Go for it. But when push comes to shove, that is when you need to take a step back. Because that is what ignites conflicts. When someone's feelings get hurt.
Take Vortex as an example. The voice of reason here. I think he's probably one of the most mature here. And what he does for this community, shows a lot.
I find kinda ironic that we are having a good discussion about how to have a good discussionENIHCAMBUS wrote:We are having a good discussion right now, withouth conflict, because its likely that all the members here want the forum active.
I agree with that, though it should be more of a recommendation than a rule; some posts may deserve a long response.Anteroinen wrote:If there are going to be rules, I'd like a limit to the length of the replies. That was the only thing that is cumbersome in previous Meditations debates – everybody answers to each detail of the other's post, and this happens a few times and whoplah it takes about two hours to properly answer someone. Not that I didn't like going through the effort, I quite enjoyed it, but it does take time, which might discourage people from joining into the discussion. Which is what we want to encourage.
But rule shouldn't be very strict here. I mean, too restricted of an environment is no fun to spread your legs at.
I like them, a good summary of what we have said, they're not too restrictive and I think they would work well in practice. Probably rule 7 could be summarized to "Don't treat your position as superior to others in a debate", though I like the way you put it tooRedafro wrote:So here are my... lets just say guide lines:
1. Define your terms, mainly in the case of using terms in unique ways or when it seems someone is misunderstanding you, but any time it will help make the discussion clearer without adding too much needless bulk.
2. Ask clarifying questions before you criticize or site inconsistencies: sometimes there is just a misunderstanding or a lack of further information.
3. Keep statements and replies brief. Make note of points you want to return to and do so when there is a lull in the conversation or an appropriate time to return to the topic.
4. Our goal is not to "win" the debate, but to have an interesting and informative discussion in which all parties learn from each other.
5. Embrace criticism as a way of refining and strengthening your own beliefs, not as a personal attack.
6. Frame criticisms respectfully, realizing that someone's deeply held beliefs are sometimes indivisible from their own identity.
7. Humbly realize that we are all merely human, not omniscient subgods who can confirm with absolute certainty that our beliefs are superior or even correct. Rather, we are all limited in knowledge, reason, and capacity to observe, forming our commitments and conclusions (our biases if you will) from out limited knowledge, experience, reason, and observations. We could, after all, be wrong about anything and everything and just be brains stuck in a vat in some distant corner of the submachine.
1-3 have ended up being more practical and obvious rules, while 4-7 are almost principles of attitude. I find myself especially proud of 5 and 6 as they address criticism from both the giving and receiving end.
Anyhow, how is that for a list of "rules?"
I'm fine with it, but why isn't one thread for all that enough for you? I know, they are meant for different purposes, but effectively all conversations converge to the same thing all the time.Boingo wrote:Ethics, effectively.
I still don't see any really good reason why we cannot procrastinate in the procrastination threads.
No new threads needed, imo.Babylon wrote:Just a thought, but where are the respectful and meaningful discussion going to take place?
Do we need a Politics thread or the like, where we just talk about politics, or will we do it all on the meditations board?