Printable View
Over the years (10) that I have been here, participation on the "Politics, Religion, and Society" threads has declined to barely a trickle. I am curious as to why. So I have made a poll to see if members will share their thoughts on their lack of participation. Feel free also to include comments, especially if you select "Other". You may select more than one answer.
Thank you.
FWIW, it has been my experience that online discussions of religion and politics go like this:
A: "You believe X, which is [insert negative adjectives here]."
B: "I do not believe X. I believe Y."
A: "No you don't, you liar. And anyway, Y is also [bunch of negative]."
[devolution into vulgarity and name-calling]
Why such discussions don't go like the following is beyond me:
A: "I believe X."
B: "Really? I thought you believed Y. Please explain further."
A: "Here are some details about X."
I suppose conversation #2 is too boring and civilized for the interwebs.
ethernautrix commented along the same lines some years ago - and she is no longer around.Quote:
Originally Posted by LizEF
Quote:
Originally Posted by ethernautrix
I initially suggested the creation of that sub-forum, possibly with others in concert, to the administration at the time. It may have been when Dan had a hand in running the site (the best years) but could have been earlier, when Eric still did it (and cared). It was common to have these topics intrude upon actual pen topics, and I/we felt it best that they had a place of their own. It was to be unmoderated, and also for the posts to NOT show up in the "What's New" posts, as to not trigger or click-bait people.
I'm happy that people have used it for those purposes. With only rare exception, I never found a desire to discuss those matters in this type of setting, and my occasional reading of posts there confirmed not only that many people had/have a hard time keeping a civil tone, but that I would very likely succumb to that behavior, as well. It is a personal weakness and the best way I have to keep friendships and remain politely honest is to completely avoid that place.
I could not have said it better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Szanto
Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk
Indeed, an interesting question (although I would have phrased it the other way around).
I have several answers to this question at once:
- Because I live in Switzerland and we have our own political and social problems...(but which I would not want to talk about in another place on the internet).
- because I am not a native speaker and would not be up to the fierce verbal battles.
- because in my free time I prefer to occupy myself with positive things rather than arguing.
and last but not least:
- because this is a fountain pen forum!
Our passion for fountain pens is what we have in common. If you have argued with someone about politics, religion or society, you will never be able to have an unbiased conversation about fountain pens with the same person again.
In short: this subforum has toxic potential. Still, it's probably a good thing that it exists. That way, all the other sub-forums can be spared toxic off topic discussions.
I appreciate all these comments thus far. Thank you. Let's see what more might be added over the coming days.
It's also my sense that user traffic and participation is lower than it used to be, particularly outside of the sales threads. There are many user names I don't see anymore anywhere on the site.
Quote:
Originally Posted by christof
While you may feel this way, it is inaccurate as a blanket statement.
I correct myself:Quote:
Originally Posted by kazoolawQuote:
Originally Posted by christof
While you may feel this way, it is inaccurate as a blanket statement.
If I have argued with someone about politics, religion or society, I will never be able to have an unbiased conversation about fountain pens with the same person again.
I had voted that it was a an environment that was too combative, however, given the subject matter of politics, religion and society it is a forum that tends to attract debate and argument.
To be honest I would rather that we continue to ring fence the hotheads who want to debate PR and S and to know that this is a no go zone for me.
On another unrelated forum there is a learned legal adviser who has suggested that a forum that permits contentious debate in breach of good social order could find itself to be in a difficult position, legally.
As Jon outlined above, the sub-forum was set up intentionally without moderation. Kind of a quarantine. Note the introduction: "Not for the faint hearted," and "You have been warned."
Debate is not for everyone, but there is a reason it is part of scholastic forensic programs. It teaches logic, discipline, and speaking skills. In that setting the debate is about the issue, not the opposing debater.
Can/does debate slide down into ad hominem attacks and vitriol? Yes it can, and it does.
All of life, as christof alluded to, is not an argument, nor even a debate.
One last thought, gotta be careful of which lawyer, learned or otherwise, gets to define the "breach of good social order."
'Not interested ...' Partly — it's very US-centric and doesn't seem to go anywhere.
'... too combative.' Partly. Nothing wrong with vigorous debate, but often it looks more like abuse than argument.
For those who do participate in that part of the forum, what is the appeal?
I thought Facebook and Tritter filled this void.
Exactly my point. All I can figure is that some people think their abuse / insults / derision constitute "debate".Quote:
Originally Posted by catbert
Good question.Quote:
Originally Posted by catbert
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by catbert
Fair question. Very subjective answers, I assume. Even as early as 2nd grade, my parents asked me (and my siblings) to cut out newspaper articles and present the topics to the family at the dinner table. Thus began my "interest" (or at least a certain habit). I have been interested more deeply in those topics since I was about 16. In high school, I used to stay up late at night in "bullshit sessions" on these topics. We had just been through the end of the Viet Nam war and Watergate, so political engagement was continuing to rise. I read the papers, went to some town meetings, joined protest marches, sit-ins, etc. I wrote for my university paper on several current topics. I made friends through these various activities. I'm over 60 now, and still am energized by these topics and the discussion of them. I am intrigued by the workings of law and the topics of justice and religion.Quote:
For those who do participate in that part of the forum, what is the appeal?
Here, the "appeal" has waned for me over the years. Mostly now I just consider myself a voice for a certain point of view. I *try* now to avoid debate, argument, diatribe, etc (I am not perfect in this restraint), but I also don't want my point of view to be lost simply because the conversation gets nasty or personal. So now I mostly just express it, and move along. Some old habitual behaviors die harder than others, however.
And thanks again for the thoughtful responses to the prompt.
So great, thank you! :pound:Quote:
Originally Posted by catbert
I used to post in there. It became toxic as fuck and (for me) ultimately pointless.
A sour stew of imported talking points and bad faith.
Life has improved since I quit going in there. I do peek in once in a while.
@manoeuver You're not the only one to express this. Honestly, your presence (or lack) is one of my belle-weathers for the tone of those back pages. You do what you need.
Thanks TSherbs. You are good at having nuanced conversations, which is what I was after in there. happy to discourse with you via email whenever you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by TSherbs