Residency Policy, or "Hello From A Subpontine Lifeform".

[Fearless]

With all due respect guys I sometimes really wonder why you expend so much energy on these guys... they know exactly what they are doing... because they are not here for civilised discussion. They have something to prove, their own agenda, time and time again.

I know the thrill of the chase is appealing to some but right from post five:

Hello shaquille20
What evidence would you point to as supporting your faith?
Regards
WLB

That should have been all it needed.

But let's play it out in stages:

"Hi, I'm so and so, I am a believer hoping to have some interesting discussions with you all :)"

"Hi and welcome... so, what evidence do you have to prove your [Insert stated deity]?"

"I have all the evidence I need, from what the [insert relevant book here] tells me which inspired by the word of [insert whichever bloody god serves its purpose]"

"You need to do better than that!"

* off to Fantasy Island

"Oh great, there goes my freedom of speech... I am so oppressed here... Atheists talk about no censorship but here I am unable to say what I feel"

"But you are here talking now, what's the difference? Oh, and where was that evidence?"

"You guys are so full of your own interests, you are no better than [insert random name/group]... hypocrites!"

"Are you over criticising the nasty Atheists?"

* Pause for a few days

"Sorry I have been busy... I will get to your questions soon"

"Did anyone get a reply?" "What was the evidence?"

* Few days of pause

"I have a life you know, so yeah as I was saying [random bloody god] is accepting of everyone, he loves everyone... in chapter [insert some piece of annoying scripture]"

"Can you just answer the question?"

...and so it goes.

shaquille20, post your evidence, keeping in mind that you have the 'burden of proof (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof)' whilst avoiding the argument from ignorance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance). You have been warned a number of times already. Quit distracting discussion with your wounded fawn play, no one has censored you, you are still able to speak in this forum so make it count or make it your conclusion.

[Loki]

Notice these two surprisingly common themes lately, usually in the first few posts and then repeated at occasional intervals:


I am a very important person
I am very busy and can't put a lot of time into this


very sad

[Caio]

Good point Fearless...personally i like arguing to vent i think, its like my meditation and cure all my worldly woes. That being said i would rather debate "theology" than "dogma" or "truth", at least with the interpretation of scripture you can have an educated argument and get somewhere. To be honest the best arguments I've had with theists are those who say from the onset that their beliefs have no proof...they are usually the ones who have no interest in proselytizing or imposing their beliefs on others.

[Sir Patrick Crocodile]

With all due respect guys I sometimes really wonder why you expend so much energy on these guys... they know exactly what they are doing... because they are not here for civilised discussion. They have something to prove, their own agenda, time and time again.

I know the thrill of the chase is appealing to some but right from post fiveI must admit it helps me to vent out a lot. It also helps me boost my self esteem up a little. At least now I know there is a chance that I may be smarter than a cucumber. :D

But let's play it out in stages:

"Hi, I'm so and so, I am a believer hoping to have some interesting discussions with you all :)"

"Hi and welcome... so, what evidence do you have to prove your [Insert stated deity]?"

"I have all the evidence I need, from what the [insert relevant book here] tells me which inspired by the word of [insert whichever bloody god serves its purpose]"

"You need to do better than that!"

* off to Fantasy Island

"Oh great, there goes my freedom of speech... I am so oppressed here... Atheists talk about no censorship but here I am unable to say what I feel"

"But you are here talking now, what's the difference? Oh, and where was that evidence?"

"You guys are so full of your own interests, you are no better than [insert random name/group]... hypocrites!"

"Are you over criticising the nasty Atheists?"

* Pause for a few days

"Sorry I have been busy... I will get to your questions soon"

"Did anyone get a reply?" "What was the evidence?"

* Few days of pause

"I have a life you know, so yeah as I was saying [random bloody god] is accepting of everyone, he loves everyone... in chapter [insert some piece of annoying scripture]"

"Can you just answer the question?"

...and so it goes.Perhaps the following soliloquy may add to that wonderful play:
Is this a sacred text I see before me?
With the pages open before mine eyes?
Come, let me quote thee.
I read thee not.
And yet I follow thee still!

[riddlemethis]

Notice these two surprisingly common themes lately, usually in the first few posts and then repeated at occasional intervals:


I am a very important person
I am very busy and can't put a lot of time into this

very sad

Yes, and other posturings which fly completely in the face of the fact that they weren't frog marched in here with a gun at their heads and forced to begin multiple threads about the same shit for which they have no substantial answers.

A word to the theist: If you are going to insinuate yourself into our community, please understand you are engaging people who choose to give the time to this place & consider doing so to be important. If you are here because you have a spare 10 minutes in your oh so busy schedule and simply couldn't think of anything better to do, we recommend you don't fucking bother, because the outcome is never good; although you will end up with a rather enviable collection of trading cards for your futile efforts. If you must join in, please be serious, please answer questions & please give the conversation you start they courtesy of your time.

[Fearless]

Good point Fearless...personally i like arguing to vent i think, its like my meditation and cure all my worldly woes. That being said i would rather debate "theology" than "dogma" or "truth", at least with the interpretation of scripture you can have an educated argument and get somewhere. To be honest the best arguments I've had with theists are those who say from the onset that their beliefs have no proof...they are usually the ones who have no interest in proselytizing or imposing their beliefs on others.
Ok, that's fair enough of a point. I just see people getting frustrated which I have decided to underline and put in bold because theists tend to confuse it with anger or being nasty etc... so I decide to back track and drag myself through 10+ pages to see if there has been any unfair play involved and come out the end with the same story every time.

So what is the answer? All discussion is fair game unless primary absolutes are claimed... i.e. 'God exists'
Maybe this deserves its own thread. hrmm.

Your last sentence is a bit alien to me. But it sounds like it would be quite refreshing. Are we likely to meet any of them here? :rolleyes:

[Sir Patrick Crocodile]

@Black: perhaps one regarding "censorship" accusations.

Why are you censoring me and oppressing me?
We are not censoring or oppressing you. The problem is that whenever you do something against the rules, proselytizing and trolling included, you get sent off to the Island for a holiday.

You can always get back off, as a few members have done successfully, by proving yourself worthy of being rational in many aspects.

However, if you break the rules, do not act like a persecuted crybaby as this will be frowned upon. There are many other forums out there which will simply give you a ban on similar things, so this forum is fairly tolerant. However persistent troll techniques may result in a permanent ban.

Feel free to modify as I am not the best with words.

[Loki]

Should the last 10 or so posts be considered a derail and moved somewhere less likely to intrude on the thread?

[Caio]

Ok, that's fair enough of a point. I just see people getting frustrated which I have decided to underline and put in bold because theists tend to confuse it with anger or being nasty etc... so I decide to back track and drag myself through 10+ pages to see if there has been any unfair play involved and come out the end with the same story every time.

So what is the answer? All discussion is fair game unless primary absolutes are claimed... i.e. 'God exists'
Maybe this deserves its own thread. hrmm.

Your last sentence is a bit alien to me. But it sounds like it would be quite refreshing. Are we likely to meet any of them here? :rolleyes:

I guess it is a bit self inflicted too, ive decided not to give it as much effort as i used to, or with the passion i had when i first joined...its draining going over the same old arguments and getting nowhere...I would actually just like to get one of them to actually question their own faith and ask the hard questions themselves, if they come out being a believer so be it, but at least ask the questions!

Unfortunately the smart ones i know are too timid to come here, i asked one of them to join but they just politely declined. This coming from somebody studying theology at university...if they dont have a reasoned argument for the existence of god, then one doesn't exist!

[SchizoDeluxe]

I have to admit, despite it's "fun-ness" it's starting to become a bit tedious. The arguments are always the same and it never holds any water. The only ones that come close to being somewhat challenging are the intellectual ones who try to use science to validate their point of opinion but those arguments are, in my opinion, just as tedious in their intellectual elitism as the stupid ones that have become amusing cliche's. But still, it's fun to see them come here to get shot down in flames :D

[Loki]

Thanks, shaquille20 may be the current king of obfuscation, still no need to tromp muddy feet all over his/her thread.

I'm wondering if any sticky, warning, message, please read etc. will make any differnece whatsoever. A large majority of recent tourists seem to think the rules don't apply to them. They are the one true Scotsman and we will gasp in awe when we hear their blinding truth, and it will be nothing we have ever heard before. As someone said recently (Croc?) they are either shit salesmen, or are only here to troll.

Unfortunately I feel we still need to treat each one as though they come bearing genuine questions or searching for genuine understanding, which gives them a few pages to get their patter going. Maybe we need to be more up front after this point.

Up front doesn't seem to work for ratskep though, the nutters just ignore everything but their own voice. I've even seen theists berating other theists over there for being moronic trolls, but it makes no difference (though john832 trolling shaq was interesting if not confusing).

Perhaps one solution to the pointless death spiral we seem to be getting regularly is, when symptoms are obvious, to insist on the discussion moving to a more formal debate situation (Crocs suggestion again I think). Though who would volunteer for such duty is a good question.

[Annie]

Im too new here to understand the implications of different options but I am already getting tired of people who seem to be here to troll or preach. I think most of us here are genuinely interested in intelligent discussion/debate and value knowledge. That's why we continue to engage with these people. However, they seem to be painfully comfortable in stirring the pot and nothing more. They need a quick, short, sharp kick to get them off their merry go-rounds and into a place where they have to either think or leave.

[Annie]

Yup. It's the waffle in between that seems to present the problem. Maybe a call/flag (in red font maybe) immediately after a claim to alert other forumites to the requirement. Sometimes we need something simple and quick to stop us from jumping in and prolonging the misery.

[Annie]

Sounds good to me black. That way we don't get dragged in by the crap. So easy to do when there is so much of it!

Ninja for ywhy will have his karate chops dashed!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[atheist_angel]

I reckon that might be workable.



Ninja4YHWH posts a claim with no substantiation.
ZeroGodOption calls his bluff on that, and informs a Mod by PM. (Mod on duty? Recording Angel {no relation}?)
The claim is marked against Ninja4YHWH until something like proof (no goddidits or biblical refs) is posted.
If a claim remains outstanding for too long, the Mods have the option of suspending or banning Ninja4YHWH.
At Mods' discretion, Ninja4YHWH may be asked to show cause, or summarily sent away.

How's that sound? Would that be like a "strike one" until they follow up with something substantiating to back their claim?

Yeah OK, I'm in. If someone PMs a summery of the claim (or sometimes just a link will due) then, any Mod On Duty can leave a big red alert note.

[Worldslaziestbusker]

Hello folks
I've been wondering if residents of fantasy island could be taken on by individual atheists. The debating forum held this promise but Digitalos has been the only taker so far. Perhaps a cab rank system would work in matching new theists with willing atheists.
This individual attention would prevent the theist from running home to church, crowing about their phyrric victory in the face of insurmountable odds. It would also offer forum members an opportunity to expand their knowledge as they may have to counter arguments they usually leave up to other members.
If nothing else, it will keep the threads short.
Less entertaining but more likely to get someone thinking, perhaps?
Cheerio
WLB

[riddlemethis]

I'm not familiar with what administration is attached to exiling someone to FI, but I presume they get an explanatory PM? Perhaps such could be amended to include links to a list of 'arguments you may think are novel but aren't' & 'shit we've all heard before', as well as a primer on what constitutes an expression of opinion vs. making a claim which requires reasoned support.

The thing I find is unclear to all but the rarest theist is that demanding evidence for the voracity of statements like 'god says this/that/the other', 'god exists' etc, is not curtailing freedom of expression nor denying anybody their opinion. Opinion is expressed in a particular way so that it is clearly not intended as a statement of fact. I think if we are clear on this point, about what is an opinion & what is a fact statement, then we'll have a clearing to swing the ban-hammer that everyone understands. Perhaps.

When it is all said and done though, I am frequently puzzled about why these people come here unless they are actually struggling with their faith. I'd rather dash my eyes out with a fork than go to a religious forum to shoot the shit. Someone like Johnny numbers is a case in point I think - that boy is just one SWOT Vac away from atheism - but our Mussie friend. . .phew.

[Loki]

The bonus with enforcing more rigour is that regular forumites will also be forced to apply more rigour. With the current crop of baseless assertions, our replies can be pretty sloppy too. I'm certainly guilty of this lately. Most of the current visitors don't seem able to follow their own arguments and are pretty caught up in their own evangelising, so they probably don't even notice when we say silly things.

Sometimes the only reply possible is something silly. :D

Having several people respond to their trivia certainly confuses the issue and makes it easier for them to duck and weave, but it is a forum so that is probably unavoidable.

I like Annies idea of puting questions you'd particularly like answered in red. Other posters might like to repeat the question in red at the end of their posts, just to reinforce it and convey that we'd like an answer.

[Loki]

riddlemethis

There has been a little work towards a list of oft repeated questions with responses, but it's not up to publication yet. I'll PM it to you if you'd like a read, just let me know.

[atheist_angel]

I like Annies idea of puting questions you'd particularly like answered in red. Other posters might like to repeat the question in red at the end of their posts, just to reinforce it and convey that we'd like an answer. It sounds like a good strategy to me!

[wolty]

The bonus with enforcing more rigour is that regular forumites will also be forced to apply more rigour. With the current crop of baseless assertions, our replies can be pretty sloppy too. I'm certainly guilty of this lately. Most of the current visitors don't seem able to follow their own arguments and are pretty caught up in their own evangelising, so they probably don't even notice when we say silly things.

Sometimes the only reply possible is something silly. :D



Loki, I agree with this, but we have the problem of following baseless idiocy, which drags us down to their level. I know what you mean and I have noticed it with myself as well.

The problem I see is that, most have almost no education about many things like evolution, critical thinking and so on. We have to teach them how to debate, after giving them an education on the world around them.
And also some know next to nothing about the bible. So we have to teach them the bible as well, before we can even get started.

[wolty]

Perhaps we have to work like anybody intent on improving the breed, and cull the really-funny-looking ones before their eyes open.


If we cull those that are incapable when they arrive, we would have no-one to talk to. It has to be like 99% that have no idea.

Another one to add to the list

We have to get them to understand what an atheist is before we can also get started. That is very annoying as well. Most of them have mush for brains being unable to understand a simple concept.


My list of annoying fundie traits.

1. Understand what an atheist is. Important.
2. Burden of proof is with you.
3. Questioning your belief is not a personal attack.
4. Circular reasoning means I get annoyed.
5. Read your bible.
6. Don't pick and choose from the bible. It is all or nothing.
7. Remember, it is your interpretation, which means not alot.
8. Answer questions.
9. Understand, the bible does not prove god.
10. Understand that science does not equal atheism and vice versa.
11. Learn the concepts of evolution. (it isn't difficult)
12. Understand we are not picking on your religion, we are picking on all of them.
13. Don't go all "free speech" on us. You are our guest.

Not a bad list, if I do say so myself.

[wolty]

I have an even better idea.

Make the fundies actually read and check that list before they can post. Might save some brain cells on my behalf.

[wolty]

@Wolty: I like the list, indeed. Thanks.:)

I'm taking it over to discuss with Admin and other mods. If it gets up, I'll be rewriting it into Nice Words, and will call it Wolty's List.
Sounds great. Although I will maybe do another list with Not Nice Words, just to see how I go. :D



Now please tell me your last name isn't Schindler.

Schindler's Lifts. (yes, same guy)
Hehehe, not in this lifetime. :D

[TÐöer]

I reckon that might be workable.



Ninja4YHWH posts a claim with no substantiation.
ZeroGodOption calls his bluff on that, and informs a Mod by PM. (Mod on duty? Recording Angel {no relation}?)
The claim is marked against Ninja4YHWH until something like proof (no goddidits or biblical refs) is posted.
If a claim remains outstanding for too long, the Mods have the option of suspending or banning Ninja4YHWH.
At Mods' discretion, Ninja4YHWH may be asked to show cause, or summarily sent away.
How's that sound?

I like the idea. And as AA suggested, perhaps give them 3 assertion strikes. They need to answer them before making new assertions/opening new thread.

They can either answer our question successfully, or admit they were wrong, in which we will pardon them.

The problem is they never admit they were wrong, they just ignore the question. And some other guy comes in and repeats the whole thing.

Perhaps if we get 1 guy to admit they were wrong, we can always point others to his last unanswered Question.

Agree with WLB,
They often come in and get too overwhelmed with questions.
Perhaps we should make them aware that the option to debate with anyone of us is open.

[Seamus]

It seems I remain a voice crying in the wilderness:

Nuke Fantasy Island. I do not now and have never agreed with the notion of restricted forum membership; it IS censorship.

Either a person's behaviour is acceptable or it is not.By all means have system of warning (s) and temporary ban(s) before a permanent ban.


We owe these people exactly nothing,anyone who joins any forum needs to fit in or leave.

[nari]

As an arbiter on another (unrelated) site, here is my 2 cents' worth:

A separate forum which is closed to ALL but moderators and arbiters, to discuss dirty washing without the world knowing about it and butting in on the act.

All posters are given a chance to show they are interested in debating topics relevant to the site. The exceptions are:

Spammers. Those who reveal nothing about themselves on first post, are asked to do so. If this doesn't work with encouragement, they can be warned once more then banned.
Trolls. As above.
Downright dickheads are warned once.
Ad hominems are not tolerated.
Those who show ability to engage in appropriate discussion, whether in agreement or not, are always welcome.

nari

[Loki]

They can either answer our question successfully, or admit they were wrong, in which we will pardon them.

I disagree. They do not need to answer the question "successfully" or "admit" they are wrong. We need to be approaching it from the angle of "good questions and arguments are welcomed, but if you want to have your argument taken seriously you need to back it up with reason, and if we disagree it's not a personal attack".

They do however need to address questions which are repeated and to provide some rational argument to support their case. We don't have to agree, but I'd like to see argument I can at least respect (i.e. argument with some substance), and we need to be able to applaud good argument, even if we disagree.

I suspect we will rarely see theists admit they are wrong on most points, it's the start of a slippery slope for them, and they don't want to go there. The best we can hope for is that they will go away and think about our points, at least subconciously.

I find the freedom of speech one interesting. They aver that their freedom of speech is being ignored because we don't take what they say at face value. I think we need to be pointing out that freedom of speech means that we don't have to take what they say at face value and have a right to question.

[TÐöer]

I disagree. They do not need to answer the question "successfully" or "admit" they are wrong. We need to be approaching it from the angle of "good questions and arguments are welcomed, but if you want to have your argument taken seriously you need to back it up with reason, and if we disagree it's not a personal attack".


What I meant to say was that, perhaps they genuinely did not know it, and on explaining to them realise and admit their fault. In future anyone who repeats the line of question can be directed to the same post.

Or perhaps they were indeed right and successfully defended their position.

Just my 2 cents. Anything goes; I'm for the majority and the mods.

[Praxis]

Meh. Part of me agrees with Seamus, I have to say!

Another part of me likes Annie's succinct "think or get out" dictum.

I'm not educated enough to debate the more slippery types (hi Fass!) nor patient enough with the bovine stolidness of the preach-or-die-trying types (hi Troofie!) and quickly lapse into rudeness and ad hom (which I admit is conduct unbecoming but at least I'm honest). Basically, this is a roundabout way of me saying I care very little for the deluded religious types that come here. I don't even pop into FI all that often but for all that, I can see that the fact we do provide a (albeit limited) space for them to air their particular brand of what-saves-ya is a decent enough gesture and one certainly not afforded to the likes of us who would venture into a fundie forum with some thoughtful and considerate questions (although I'm with riddlemethis here - I'd rather have unanaesthetised root canal than pop in for a nice chat at Answers in Tenesmus or FundiesRUs).

Anyhoo - yeah, I guess I agree that wolty's list is a fine list indeed, that the godsters, allahites and other assorted nuts need to know up front from the get-go what is expected of them and that an alert system seems a good idea.

That's all. I just thought I'd better respond in this thread to show I'm paying attention ;)

As you were.

[Sir Patrick Crocodile]

Is there not a sort of weighted warning system you can use? Like demerit points?

[wearestardust]

If I were designing the site behind the veil of ignorance, I would agree with the idea that theists should be given free reign.

In the world we actually live in, however, given free reign their tendrils would strangle everything, and the only option would be to cut their threads off at the roots at the first sign of a tangent.

By confining them to FI at least they can be more easily monitored and given more of a chance to demonstrate that, in time, they might proffer something rational or interesting.

[riddlemethis]

@RMT: it has been said that missionary zeal gives one a warm feeling that not many others will notice, kind of like piddling yourself in a dark suit.

And there are some who like that warm feeling too. Never underestimate the diversity of human desires and motivations.

If you keep being such a funny btard I might just understand how they feel /pissingmyself!

[riddlemethis]

If we cull those that are incapable when they arrive, we would have no-one to talk to. It has to be like 99% that have no idea.

Another one to add to the list

We have to get them to understand what an atheist is before we can also get started. That is very annoying as well. Most of them have mush for brains being unable to understand a simple concept.


My list of annoying fundie traits.

1. Understand what an atheist is. Important.
2. Burden of proof is with you.
3. Questioning your belief is not a personal attack.
4. Circular reasoning means I get annoyed.
5. Read your bible.
6. Don't pick and choose from the bible. It is all or nothing.
7. Remember, it is your interpretation, which means not alot.
8. Answer questions.
9. Understand, the bible does not prove god.
10. Understand that science does not equal atheism and vice versa.
11. Learn the concepts of evolution. (it isn't difficult)
12. Understand we are not picking on your religion, we are picking on all of them.
13. Don't go all "free speech" on us. You are our guest.

Not a bad list, if I do say so myself.
Yep this is what I had in mind to be PMd to them when they are FId

[Fearless]

@WAS: I know what you are getting at but I will say as a side note if 'they' were given free reign they would most often feel compelled to drop scripture in here and there and no doubt thread hop.

I doubt I would hang around.

[wolty]

@WAS: I know what you are getting at but I will say as a side note if 'they' were given free reign they would most often feel compelled to drop scripture in here and there and no doubt thread hop.

I doubt I would hang around.


I agree with Fearless, the dropping of scripture would really annoy me, and I don't need any help at all with getting annoyed.
I like the sanctuary that is AFA, but am quite happy with FI, I don't have to go there if I don't want.

[wearestardust]

@WAS: I know what you are getting at but I will say as a side note if 'they' were given free reign they would most often feel compelled to drop scripture in here and there and no doubt thread hop.

I doubt I would hang around.

I suspect we are agreeing and I was being unclear.

I just meant: principles aside, if we don't keep them caged, they will wander to and fro sprinkling their fairy dust. In bloody great lumps. In our tubes, blocking our nets. And that would be Bad.

[Fearless]

Yep, I was with you.