Cheers to @darrenwalker

For being a good sport, even though we disagree and I found some of your comments distasteful and ignorant (as I'm sure you did mine) I appreciate the fact that you engaged me in good faith discussion and put forth the effort to explain in detail your point of view.

Also, if my comment on your sexual preference was inaccurate as is understood by the scientific community in general then I offer my apology on that front since I was not actually intending to insult you. We may disagree but I'm not generally one for unsolicited and mean spirited name calling. Cheers.

@DarrenWalker

I feel dead inside.

Is that normal?

pmvines

.

Sideon

And here were have a demonstration of an Academy Award nominee for "Most unctuous, dreadful, and insincere apology." Other than that, the performance was stellar.

Morpheus

The three comments above to the OP are A-mazing :-)

...You guys crack me up. Insincere or no—

@CuddlyGuy2018: Thanks for calling me a good sport. I think it's decent of you to admit that the scientific community might not consider asexuality a disorder even though it's plain that it really looks like one to you. It can be tough to admit that scientists think you're wrong. You took a good stab at admitting that, and I commend you for the effort.

I'm also aware that it can be awfully difficult for people to avoid unsolicited and mean-spirited name calling when dealing with me. I don't blame you for it. You did all right for someone whose worldview clashes so fundamentally with mine.

hogboblin

Something I’ve learned from the previous thread, and this thread:

It’s completely fine to speak poorly of an entire group of people (and specific members of said group) if the insults are put forth as an opinion—despite the “opinion” being factually wrong (which can be verified within a few seconds thanks to the power of the internet).

Pretty neat, CC.

@hogboblin Perhaps... We try to minimize censorship on the forums.

As Mark stated in that previous forum to which I presume you are referring, there's no rule against expressing controversial opinion if it is done respectfully and in the interest of discussion. However, referencing someone directly in connection to that opinion which makes it provocative, intentional or not.

hogboblin

@SoulcuddlerZ

Could I make a post about how, in my opinion*, phrenology is totally valid—so long as I don’t call out specific users as being less than human or generally inferior?

*This is not my actual opinion. I’m giving an example here.

Also: is CC a government agency of some sort? Or part of one?

@hogboblin
It might just toe the line! But, unless the rule violations are evident, I wouldn't be too quick to pounce.

Also: no.

hogboblin

All right, so, given that CC isn’t affiliated with the government in any manner, this isn’t an issue of censorship, but of what sort of platform CC wants to provide to its users.

Furthermore, CC has zero issues with their platform being associated with those who say that certain groups of people are inferior or abnormal.

Is that all correct?

@hogboblin I wouldn't say "zero issues," but you are free to report the posts which lead you to draw that opinion.

@Mark @reurbo your thoughts?

@hogboblin: Humans are humans. Odds are everyone will have at least one horrible, offensively wrong opinion at some point in their lives. So long as they're not beating a member of our community over the head with it, why kick them out?

Frankly, you and I have some pretty offensive beliefs. I'm glad for the tolerance.

Mark

I'm not sure what needs to be added on my part.

We encourage open discussion and to do that you need to allow controversial opinion. Everyone gets offended by different things and that isn't necessarily the responsibility of the person airing the view.

The most important thing is the intent and how it is expressed. If it's said in the spirit of having a respectful exchange of views then it's probably going to be ok. If it's something that is going to disrupt the community here then it might not be ok even if it does fulfil the previous criteria.

As with most things, mods will assess on a case-by-case basis rather than some binary approach.

pmvines

Debate and attack are two different things. So t express a generalized opinion, though can be done for mere purposes of flaming and trolling, is a little less black and white when it comes to infracting as specifically attacking an individual. Doesn't necessarily make either right or better than the other, just if you are speaking purely what is tolerated and not tolerated, then there is a distinction.

ReltvlyCanshes

I think the language being used and critiqued is mean spirited. @CuddlyGuy2018 May have used language that offended someone, and it may have been based in ignorance. He acknowledged that. I was and am ignorant to this as well but i learned from reading these posts. We have to be able to allow people to learn and grow, tolerance goes both ways, you have to be tolerant of people who know something and who don’t.

I think so many o defend their own position as if it’s the only one. It could be unpopular and wrong, but at least try and see it from each other’s perspective. I think it’s ugly not too.

Mark

In the case of @CuddlyGuy2018 - I warned him and he rage quit the website, going by his leaving message to me.

TouchIsTLC

@Mark Thank you for the amusing update! #RAGEQUITWINFORTHERESTOFUS

@hogboblin & @DarrenWalker the more I read from you two in particular the more I like you. Thank you for being you, you guys ROCK!

Wow. @Mark Superb!

Sideon

@DarrenWalker is a splendid human with more grace and patience than I have. Or care to have.

I have no qualms in going after trolls and will go for their proverbial jugular every time. The OP secured his troll-hood after the 2nd time he specifically tagged @DarrenWalker . The personal attacks were unacceptable. As for his rage-quit, my only response, because I'm classy this way: bwahahahahaha!

TouchIsTLC

@Sideon forgot to include you in my bromance adoration declarations!