Joseph Lofthouse wrote:
For example, saying "Science has definitely proven that meat causes cancer, diabetes, and heart disease!", would get a post put on probation, because it is telling "The Truth", However, the following statement would sail through moderation. "I don't eat meat because I worry that it might cause cancer, diabetes, and heart disease". The first statement is "telling the truth". The second statement is describing someone's emotions. A person's emotions are always valid.
I guess my point is that we can be respectful of a persons feelings while also having a healthy, respectful discussion of opposing viewpoints. But it seems from the posts here that isn't welcomed. But I could be wrong about that, which is ok too. I've been wrong many times in my life, it doesn't bother me to learn something new that changes my viewpoint on a subject.
chip sanft wrote:
I think the discussion here is more about how the purpose of Permies, as defined by its creator and owner Paul Wheaton, isn't the place to tell people they're wrong. There are sites like that out there, if that's what your looking for. Here it's more about a supportive environment for gentle souls who may have ideas that the general public holds to be wrong or not quite right or just goofy. I think it promotes a healthy attitude about internet discussion in general, too, but that's just me.
Jeremy Franklin wrote:I wonder if instead of regulating what phrasing people used, if instead, it might be more tolerant and inclusive to just use the moderators to judge whether or not someone is attacking the person, or just engaging in healthy conversation on a topic, with someone who has a different viewpoint.
Jeremy Franklin wrote:
Conversely, passive aggressively disagreeing with me by saying "well, my experience is totally different from yours," which by its very nature curtails any further discussion on the matter, comes across as much more disrespectful than being honest and saying, "I disagree." By saying "I disagree with you", I'm not only saying, "I disagree", but 'I respect your right to have a different opinion, and I would enjoy hashing out the differences so I can learn from your perspective."
Let's say the moderators are ... not being as rigorous as maybe they could be. In this scenario, things go bad in a hurry, right ... Clearly a bad thing, and it becomes pretty obvious pretty quickly that there's a problem and what the cause is.
I got my hand slapped.