Civility impossible?

[Foxfyre]

A USMB friend just suggested that the CDZ isn't more popular because most folks posting at USMB LIKE the personal insults, food fights, and general hostility. It is a form of recreation to them. Invariably the trolls will interpret or characterize a call for civility as no different that discouraging differences of opinion.

I'm now thinking about that. Is it true? Are there too few people who actually embrace civility and intelligent discussion of issues for a CDZ to become as popular as the politics forum where personal insults are allowed?

In general, civility is a wonderful thing, I have also found that, in general, if you treat people with respect, you get it. I remember getting a job once working in a shop with a guy that was famous for having a foul mouth. The strange thing is that after a couple of days of working with me he cleaned up his act, at least around me. I never said a word to him about what he said, I just didn't feed into it. If people want civility, they need to do the same thing, give it, and then let others see them as an example.

The problem I have is when people step in and demand that I adhere to an artifical standard. If someone tells me they never respond to anyone who uses a certain tone, I will go out of my way to use that tone just to make a point. One poster in particular was famous for insulting people, then putting them on ignore when they returned the favor.

Anyone that really wants a civil tone should go out of their way to insure that they set an example, and then adhere to it by not demanding that others toe the line.

I wish I could say the civility begets civility at USMB. I have not seen that to be the case with some. And there are just enough of those 'some' that when they organize to disrupt and derail a thread with uncivility, they too often succeed.

But maybe you're right that requesting civility is like waving a red flag in front of a bull to some people?

We do manage to maintain an acceptable level of civility say in the Coffee Shop, but it requires diligence and determination and dealing appropriately with the uncivil. There are a lot of USMB members who highly resent a civil environment like that.

 

[Flopper]

A USMB friend just suggested that the CDZ isn't more popular because most folks posting at USMB LIKE the personal insults, food fights, and general hostility. It is a form of recreation to them. Invariably the trolls will interpret or characterize a call for civility as no different that discouraging differences of opinion.

I'm now thinking about that. Is it true? Are there too few people who actually embrace civility and intelligent discussion of issues for a CDZ to become as popular as the politics forum where personal insults are allowed?

In general, civility is a wonderful thing, I have also found that, in general, if you treat people with respect, you get it. I remember getting a job once working in a shop with a guy that was famous for having a foul mouth. The strange thing is that after a couple of days of working with me he cleaned up his act, at least around me. I never said a word to him about what he said, I just didn't feed into it. If people want civility, they need to do the same thing, give it, and then let others see them as an example.

The problem I have is when people step in and demand that I adhere to an artifical standard. If someone tells me they never respond to anyone who uses a certain tone, I will go out of my way to use that tone just to make a point. One poster in particular was famous for insulting people, then putting them on ignore when they returned the favor.

Anyone that really wants a civil tone should go out of their way to insure that they set an example, and then adhere to it by not demanding that others toe the line.

I wish I could say the civility begets civility at USMB. I have not seen that to be the case with some. And there are just enough of those 'some' that when they organize to disrupt and derail a thread with uncivility, they too often succeed.

But maybe you're right that requesting civility is like waving a red flag in front of a bull to some people?

We do manage to maintain an acceptable level of civility say in the Coffee Shop, but it requires diligence and determination and dealing appropriately with the uncivil. There are a lot of USMB members who highly resent a civil environment like that.

I think most of the time civility does begets civility or at least it tones things down a bit. It's surprising how often a phrase such as, I under your concern but.. or I agree with your statement, however.. etc. Of course there are always people who never agree with anything you say and will curse you for saying it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

A USMB friend just suggested that the CDZ isn't more popular because most folks posting at USMB LIKE the personal insults, food fights, and general hostility. It is a form of recreation to them. Invariably the trolls will interpret or characterize a call for civility as no different that discouraging differences of opinion.

I'm now thinking about that. Is it true? Are there too few people who actually embrace civility and intelligent discussion of issues for a CDZ to become as popular as the politics forum where personal insults are allowed?

In general, civility is a wonderful thing, I have also found that, in general, if you treat people with respect, you get it. I remember getting a job once working in a shop with a guy that was famous for having a foul mouth. The strange thing is that after a couple of days of working with me he cleaned up his act, at least around me. I never said a word to him about what he said, I just didn't feed into it. If people want civility, they need to do the same thing, give it, and then let others see them as an example.

The problem I have is when people step in and demand that I adhere to an artifical standard. If someone tells me they never respond to anyone who uses a certain tone, I will go out of my way to use that tone just to make a point. One poster in particular was famous for insulting people, then putting them on ignore when they returned the favor.

Anyone that really wants a civil tone should go out of their way to insure that they set an example, and then adhere to it by not demanding that others toe the line.

I wish I could say the civility begets civility at USMB. I have not seen that to be the case with some. And there are just enough of those 'some' that when they organize to disrupt and derail a thread with uncivility, they too often succeed.

But maybe you're right that requesting civility is like waving a red flag in front of a bull to some people?

We do manage to maintain an acceptable level of civility say in the Coffee Shop, but it requires diligence and determination and dealing appropriately with the uncivil. There are a lot of USMB members who highly resent a civil environment like that.

I have no problem with civility, but I vehemently reject anyone imposing it. I also object to people demanding it after they insult others.

 

[Intense]

710 Threads in this forum vs over 100,000 in just the other 2. Should we infer civility is impossible when it comes to politics? Or that most participants are incapable of making their points without insults?

If you look through this forum, things are moderated heavily and it seems that threads do pretty well. There is on poster who seems want to jam up the works with endless pontificating (but name calling has gotten several of her posts removed).

I have appreciated it.

I openly admit to flaming hard on most other threads. If I had the self control I wanted, I'd never wonder outside this forum.

At the same time, threads can sit idle for days with no activity.

I get bored and I get out the napalm.

I don't mind opposition. Opposing points of view are good as they help us refine our own. And once or twice a lifetime we might actually change our minds about something It's the junior high language and insults that irk me to no end. I don't want it censored or modderated like, I just expect better from people. Set the bar higher and people try to meet it, set it too low and they'll do the minimum instead.

"Lead by example, not volume." - Me.

This Site has 4 distinct Posting Zones. They are pretty clearly defined in both the Rules Page and the Sticky Threads in specific Forums. The focus here, in the CDZ, being Zone 1, is Civil Discourse, regardless of topic matter. A lesson in civility. This is Not to be confused with underhanded attempts to flame and trash, expecting the Staff to run cover for Troll threads. Not everything can be discussed here. Threads that fail to qualify here, cannot be moved to other Forums, they will be closed, deleted, or trashed. We will sincerely try to repair damaged threads before taking any of these actions, we aim to protect the integrity of a wel thought out OP (Opening Post) which can make or break a thread. Repeated abusers here, tend to get barred from the CDZ, either short term, long term, or permanently. It's not for everyone. For those more interested in all out flame wars, the other extreme is the Taunting Area (Flame Zone, Badlands, Rubber Room). Those are the least moderated Forums on the Site. There are Rules however that apply Site wide.

 

[Intense]

In general, civility is a wonderful thing, I have also found that, in general, if you treat people with respect, you get it. I remember getting a job once working in a shop with a guy that was famous for having a foul mouth. The strange thing is that after a couple of days of working with me he cleaned up his act, at least around me. I never said a word to him about what he said, I just didn't feed into it. If people want civility, they need to do the same thing, give it, and then let others see them as an example.

The problem I have is when people step in and demand that I adhere to an artifical standard. If someone tells me they never respond to anyone who uses a certain tone, I will go out of my way to use that tone just to make a point. One poster in particular was famous for insulting people, then putting them on ignore when they returned the favor.

Anyone that really wants a civil tone should go out of their way to insure that they set an example, and then adhere to it by not demanding that others toe the line.

I wish I could say the civility begets civility at USMB. I have not seen that to be the case with some. And there are just enough of those 'some' that when they organize to disrupt and derail a thread with uncivility, they too often succeed.

But maybe you're right that requesting civility is like waving a red flag in front of a bull to some people?

We do manage to maintain an acceptable level of civility say in the Coffee Shop, but it requires diligence and determination and dealing appropriately with the uncivil. There are a lot of USMB members who highly resent a civil environment like that.

I have no problem with civility, but I vehemently reject anyone imposing it. I also object to people demanding it after they insult others.

We are Not here to run cover for veiled insults. You see a problem, report it. Try to not compound the problem. Try not to feed it, at least in the CDZ.

 

[Intense]

A USMB friend just suggested that the CDZ isn't more popular because most folks posting at USMB LIKE the personal insults, food fights, and general hostility. It is a form of recreation to them. Invariably the trolls will interpret or characterize a call for civility as no different that discouraging differences of opinion.

I'm now thinking about that. Is it true? Are there too few people who actually embrace civility and intelligent discussion of issues for a CDZ to become as popular as the politics forum where personal insults are allowed?

In general, civility is a wonderful thing, I have also found that, in general, if you treat people with respect, you get it. I remember getting a job once working in a shop with a guy that was famous for having a foul mouth. The strange thing is that after a couple of days of working with me he cleaned up his act, at least around me. I never said a word to him about what he said, I just didn't feed into it. If people want civility, they need to do the same thing, give it, and then let others see them as an example.

The problem I have is when people step in and demand that I adhere to an artifical standard. If someone tells me they never respond to anyone who uses a certain tone, I will go out of my way to use that tone just to make a point. One poster in particular was famous for insulting people, then putting them on ignore when they returned the favor.

Anyone that really wants a civil tone should go out of their way to insure that they set an example, and then adhere to it by not demanding that others toe the line.

I wish I could say the civility begets civility at USMB. I have not seen that to be the case with some. And there are just enough of those 'some' that when they organize to disrupt and derail a thread with uncivility, they too often succeed.

But maybe you're right that requesting civility is like waving a red flag in front of a bull to some people?

We do manage to maintain an acceptable level of civility say in the Coffee Shop, but it requires diligence and determination and dealing appropriately with the uncivil. There are a lot of USMB members who highly resent a civil environment like that.

Again, in the CDZ, repeated disruption like that, will get the offender barred from the forum.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I wish I could say the civility begets civility at USMB. I have not seen that to be the case with some. And there are just enough of those 'some' that when they organize to disrupt and derail a thread with uncivility, they too often succeed.

But maybe you're right that requesting civility is like waving a red flag in front of a bull to some people?

We do manage to maintain an acceptable level of civility say in the Coffee Shop, but it requires diligence and determination and dealing appropriately with the uncivil. There are a lot of USMB members who highly resent a civil environment like that.

I have no problem with civility, but I vehemently reject anyone imposing it. I also object to people demanding it after they insult others.

We are Not here to run cover for veiled insults. You see a problem, report it. Try to not compound the problem. Try not to feed it, at least in the CDZ.

The specific example I am thinking of was before you set up the new rules, and the mods were aware of it.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I have no problem with civility, but I vehemently reject anyone imposing it. I also object to people demanding it after they insult others.

We are Not here to run cover for veiled insults. You see a problem, report it. Try to not compound the problem. Try not to feed it, at least in the CDZ.

The specific example I am thinking of was before you set up the new rules, and the mods were aware of it.

I would tend to think that dwelling on things in the past BEFORE a change of rules is probably not going to help anything. I also advocate the idea that learning to let go helps the cause of civility alot.

Members who quote other members in their sig file in order to disparage said quoted members are doing neither themselves nor the forum a favor, for they are constantly carrying the past around with them, for instance. Here I am pointing fingers at no one, but just reminding that we live in the here and now, and not in the past. Or, at least, we should.

Food for thought. Respectfully presented on a well-warmed plate for you.

 

[Foxfyre]

In general, civility is a wonderful thing, I have also found that, in general, if you treat people with respect, you get it. I remember getting a job once working in a shop with a guy that was famous for having a foul mouth. The strange thing is that after a couple of days of working with me he cleaned up his act, at least around me. I never said a word to him about what he said, I just didn't feed into it. If people want civility, they need to do the same thing, give it, and then let others see them as an example.

The problem I have is when people step in and demand that I adhere to an artifical standard. If someone tells me they never respond to anyone who uses a certain tone, I will go out of my way to use that tone just to make a point. One poster in particular was famous for insulting people, then putting them on ignore when they returned the favor.

Anyone that really wants a civil tone should go out of their way to insure that they set an example, and then adhere to it by not demanding that others toe the line.

I wish I could say the civility begets civility at USMB. I have not seen that to be the case with some. And there are just enough of those 'some' that when they organize to disrupt and derail a thread with uncivility, they too often succeed.

But maybe you're right that requesting civility is like waving a red flag in front of a bull to some people?

We do manage to maintain an acceptable level of civility say in the Coffee Shop, but it requires diligence and determination and dealing appropriately with the uncivil. There are a lot of USMB members who highly resent a civil environment like that.

Again, in the CDZ, repeated disruption like that, will get the offender barred from the forum.

I know. It is unfortunate that the CDZ isn't utilized more. CK has explained that it is impractical to change the name of the Clean Debate Zone to something more enticing such as the Civil Discussion Zone. I think that small change would attract the interest of many more people. Clean Debate Zone sounds so sterile, rigid, and uninteresting that most don't even bother to look in here. Just my personal opinion.

But it shouldn't be impossible to have a civil discussion in religion or politics or anywhere else on USMB. You would think grown ups would respect a request for civility in the OP. But alas, it just doesn't work that way because there are too many who intentionally and on purpose organize to disrupt and derail threads, most especially if the thesis of the thread is something the children don't like. And they don't have to seriously break the rules to do it. They know just what bait to dangle and what code words to use and there are too many reasonable people who just can't resist responding to that. And once the reasonable people respond, it becomes increasingly difficult to report the bad post without nailing everybody. And reasoned, intelligent discussion becomes virtually impossible.

This is not something I think that can be easily regulated or managed on a board that encourages free speech such as USMB. It is just an observation.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

We are Not here to run cover for veiled insults. You see a problem, report it. Try to not compound the problem. Try not to feed it, at least in the CDZ.

The specific example I am thinking of was before you set up the new rules, and the mods were aware of it.

I would tend to think that dwelling on things in the past BEFORE a change of rules is probably not going to help anything. I also advocate the idea that learning to let go helps the cause of civility alot.

Members who quote other members in their sig file in order to disparage said quoted members are doing neither themselves nor the forum a favor, for they are constantly carrying the past around with them, for instance. Here I am pointing fingers at no one, but just reminding that we live in the here and now, and not in the past. Or, at least, we should.

Food for thought. Respectfully presented on a well-warmed plate for you.

I would think that the only reason a new board member would care about something that occurred before they joined the board is if they know what I am talking about.

There are plenty of people here who are still willing to insist on civility from people they "debate" with while simultaneously attacking posters left and right. Maybe you should XXXXX

 

[Statistikhengst]

The specific example I am thinking of was before you set up the new rules, and the mods were aware of it.

I would tend to think that dwelling on things in the past BEFORE a change of rules is probably not going to help anything. I also advocate the idea that learning to let go helps the cause of civility alot.

Members who quote other members in their sig file in order to disparage said quoted members are doing neither themselves nor the forum a favor, for they are constantly carrying the past around with them, for instance. Here I am pointing fingers at no one, but just reminding that we live in the here and now, and not in the past. Or, at least, we should.

Food for thought. Respectfully presented on a well-warmed plate for you.

I would think that the only reason a new board member would care about something that occurred before they joined the board is if they know what I am talking about.

There are plenty of people here who are still willing to insist on civility from people they "debate" with while simultaneously attacking posters left and right. Maybe you should stop XXXX.

I don't care about what has happened before, because I was not here, which is exactly why I am recommending that people let go of things past - before a rules change.

Your last sentence sounds very suspiciously as if you are accusing me of being a sock. You should be advised that this has been cleared up not once, but twice, by [MENTION=40540]Connery[/MENTION], who has already indicated this TWICE on USMB. I would respectfully recommend that you not do this, for I am sick and tired of this kind of approach, and it certainly has nothing at all to do with the CDZ, to be sure.

 

[Connery]

"Zone 1": Clean Debate Zone (CDZ) : Civil discourse is the focus here, regardless of topic matter. Constructive criticism and debate is the tone. No negative repping. No insulting, name calling, or putting down other posters. Consider it a lesson in Civics.

To accuse someone of lying is against Zone 1 rules.

The issue of sock v no sock has been darned and sewn up. Kindly do not bring up on open boards

Please stay on topic

 

[Foxfyre]

Just spit balling here and mulling concepts around in my head, but I wonder if it would work that if the OP requests civility (Zone 1 rules) in the politics, religion, Middle East etc. forums, that such thread could be moderated with Zone 1 rules? Would that create a whole bunch of extra work for the mods? Would that be impractical? Would that be unacceptable to a lot of people here?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Think the reason more threads don't show up in CDZ is just as Prof. Moriarty said in "Game of Shadows" about how people crave conflict, though Holmes stymied his plans for WWI, they'd do it themselves in time. I think there's something to that about human nature. As animals conditioned via fight or flight, many of us choose to fight on discussion forums instead of flight and ignoring things.

 

[Foxfyre]

Think the reason more threads don't show up in CDZ is just as Prof. Moriarty said in "Game of Shadows" about how people crave conflict, though Holmes stymied his plans for WWI, they'd do it themselves in time. I think there's something to that about human nature. As animals conditioned via fight or flight, many of us choose to fight on discussion forums instead of flight and ignoring things.

I honestly don't have a problem with those who use a message board to get out their anger or aggression or hostility or behave like schoolyard thugs or immature brats or who just enjoy insult fests as recreation. I have no problem with forums being offered that allow that, even encourage that within the very few limits that are imposed here.

I do have a problem with those immature, selfish, uncivil, discourteous people who do that in threads where people are trying to have a reasonable grown up discussion. Which is why this thread was of particular interest to me.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Think the reason more threads don't show up in CDZ is just as Prof. Moriarty said in "Game of Shadows" about how people crave conflict, though Holmes stymied his plans for WWI, they'd do it themselves in time. I think there's something to that about human nature. As animals conditioned via fight or flight, many of us choose to fight on discussion forums instead of flight and ignoring things.

I honestly don't have a problem with those who use a message board to get out their anger or aggression or hostility or behave like schoolyard thugs or immature brats or who just enjoy insult fests as recreation. I have no problem with forums being offered that allow that, even encourage that within the very few limits that are imposed here.

I do have a problem with those immature, selfish, uncivil, discourteous people who do that in threads where people are trying to have a reasonable grown up discussion. Which is why this thread was of particular interest to me.

I concur.

 

[Bluedog]

I go out of my way to be civil to people in any forum. My first rule is not to post with my ego. My second rule is to have a discussion not a debate. In a discussion the goal is to find points of agreement instead of defending positions on any issue. If the person I'm talking to starts flaming I walk. Not interested at that point.

IMO

 

[Foxfyre]

I go out of my way to be civil to people in any forum. My first rule is not to post with my ego. My second rule is to have a discussion not a debate. In a discussion the goal is to find points of agreement instead of defending positions on any issue. If the person I'm talking to starts flaming I walk. Not interested at that point.

IMO

That's pretty much my philosophy/preference also. I can scroll over and ignore the occasional childish verbal bully, personal insult, and troll and enjoy the discussion, but once others start taking that bait--even friends who are defending me --the discussion usually dissolves into little more than a food fight. And it seems no amount of appeals to either side will calm things down but rather prompts the trolls to call in all their buddies for reinforcement. At that point I have no interest in continuing.

I don't mind at all those who challenge my opinion on anything. I relish that. I welcome that. I encourage that. But once they make it personal, then it rapidly deteriorates into chaos.

 

[Foxfyre]

In general, civility is a wonderful thing, I have also found that, in general, if you treat people with respect, you get it. I remember getting a job once working in a shop with a guy that was famous for having a foul mouth. The strange thing is that after a couple of days of working with me he cleaned up his act, at least around me. I never said a word to him about what he said, I just didn't feed into it. If people want civility, they need to do the same thing, give it, and then let others see them as an example.

The problem I have is when people step in and demand that I adhere to an artifical standard. If someone tells me they never respond to anyone who uses a certain tone, I will go out of my way to use that tone just to make a point. One poster in particular was famous for insulting people, then putting them on ignore when they returned the favor.

Anyone that really wants a civil tone should go out of their way to insure that they set an example, and then adhere to it by not demanding that others toe the line.

I wish I could say the civility begets civility at USMB. I have not seen that to be the case with some. And there are just enough of those 'some' that when they organize to disrupt and derail a thread with uncivility, they too often succeed.

But maybe you're right that requesting civility is like waving a red flag in front of a bull to some people?

We do manage to maintain an acceptable level of civility say in the Coffee Shop, but it requires diligence and determination and dealing appropriately with the uncivil. There are a lot of USMB members who highly resent a civil environment like that.

I think most of the time civility does begets civility or at least it tones things down a bit. It's surprising how often a phrase such as, I under your concern but.. or I agree with your statement, however.. etc. Of course there are always people who never agree with anything you say and will curse you for saying it.

I don't expect agreement. I work for it. I hope for it. But other people do not have to agree with me in order to win my respect. All they have to do is be respectful and/or present a well reasoned argument that focuses on the issue and not on what anybody else thinks or has done or any other ad hominem or red herring arguments to earn my respect. They sure don't have to agree with me. And those who can competently dismantle my argument and show me that I am wrong not only win my respect but my very real admiration.

But there are too many members who consider anybody they don't agree with as being hateful, bigoted, racist, homophobic, etc. They can't allow another person his/her opinion and rebut that opinion. They seem compelled to attack the person whether or not they can articulate a rationale for why they disagree with that person.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I'm often tempted to ignore people online, but I've yet to encounter someone I disagreed with 100% or thought was irredeemable. As SunniMan mentioned the other day in some thread, "wow finall ysomething I agree with you on." Had I ignored him disagreeing on the other 99% of stuff I'da missed that Plus it teaches tolerance and self-control having to put up with people's shennanigans.