What a picture...

[Thinkpad]

If I may have a suggestion: can we remove the punishment against "insulting ideas"? Most discussion lists implement policies to punish insult against members. But why against insulting an ideology or belief? This would eventually kill discussions. How do you bring about discussions between opposing views? For instance, the whole ideology of Bahaism is insulting to muslims. Similarly, the most beliefs held by Islam is insulting to Christians (e.g. Jesus was not son of lord and was not curcified). A jewish person can sincerely believe that Jesus and Mohammad were both con artists and frauds who misled people. Can he say it? What about communists vs. capitalists, libertarians against leftists etc?

It makes more sense to ban insult against individual members. But a ban against insulting ideas and those who subscribe to them? That kills any debate. You should not be able to say: "You are stupid", but why not being able to say "Communism and its followers are stupid"? (or put any religion or ideology in its place).

My 2 cents.

there is a clear line between presenting your ideas and insuliting other people.

for example, the "Jew" in your example can say "I don't believe mohammad/Jesus are messengers because...." that would be fine and a start of a debate.

But if he comes on and says "mohammad was a killer pedophile, and Jesus was a faggot bastard"... then it would be insult. Most posters start with what seems to be a legitimate question, but when its explained to them and they don't like it answer they go on illogical rantings.

Its an Iranian problem, we cannot just agree to disagree.

 

[The_Referee]

Here are two examples:

1- X religion is full of ^*&^%(*&#(%&
2- I do not believe in X because nothing in it is truth.

No. 1 is not only unproductive, it is provocative and trying to insult whoever believes in X. So I think such posts should be banned. Please also do remember, there are many guests who come across the site and might be driven away for that attitude. Also many sick people who are after a fight from either side who would like that and might bring their garbage seeing No. 1 type of statment.

No. 2 statement, on the other hand, is not an insult (even akhounds might argue against me on this). It is simply, a start of a curious fruitful discussion.

I do think we should try to refrain from No. 1 type statements even about football teams. It is provocative, and unless said in a non-serious manner, is the most unproductive.

 

[The_Referee]

Just realized Thinkpad said what I wanted to say after I posted mine.

 

[The_Referee]

It makes more sense to ban insult against individual members. But a ban against insulting ideas and those who subscribe to them? That kills any debate. You should not be able to say: "You are stupid", but why not being able to say "Communism and its followers are stupid"? (or put any religion or ideology in its place).

deerouz Jaan,

It depends on the context. If you say such statement right after someone, who you know is a communist then you are definitely insulting the guy and trying to be provocative. That is going to be worse if ^%&$#^*&$ are used.

That would be true even in football terms. Many people say KHAAR MAADAR swear words against the team fans. Would you think that is an acceptable practice?

Anyhow, I do not really like someone claiming to be green to be so insensitive to many Iranians inside Iran offending them with ^&$^#& words or calling people to be harsh on families of PASDARs. He is anything but green in my opinion.

Green is all about freedom, and more importantly tolerance!

 

[Farsi Zaban]

Insulting an ideology is not the same as insulting people who believe in it. But both are childish in my opinion because your can always get your point across by appealing to reason.

 

[PJ]

If I may have a suggestion: can we remove the punishment against "insulting ideas"? Most discussion lists implement policies to punish insult against members. But why against insulting an ideology or belief? This would eventually kill discussions. How do you bring about discussions between opposing views? For instance, the whole ideology of Bahaism is insulting to muslims. Similarly, the most beliefs held by Islam is insulting to Christians (e.g. Jesus was not son of lord and was not curcified). A jewish person can sincerely believe that Jesus and Mohammad were both con artists and frauds who misled people. Can he say it? What about communists vs. capitalists, libertarians against leftists etc?

It makes more sense to ban insult against individual members. But a ban against insulting ideas and those who subscribe to them? That kills any debate. You should not be able to say: "You are stupid", but why not being able to say "Communism and its followers are stupid"? (or put any religion or ideology in its place).

My 2 cents.

Here are two examples:
1- X religion is full of ^*&^%(*&#(%&
2- I do not believe in X because nothing in it is truth.

No. 1 is not only unproductive, it is provocative and trying to insult whoever believes in X. So I think such posts should be banned. Please also do remember, there are many guests who come across the site and might be driven away for that attitude. Also many sick people who are after a fight from either side who would like that and might bring their garbage seeing No. 1 type of statment.

No. 2 statement, on the other hand, is not an insult (even akhounds might argue against me on this). It is simply, a start of a curious fruitful discussion.

I do think we should try to refrain from No. 1 type statements even about football teams. It is provocative, and unless said in a non-serious manner, is the most unproductive.

Very good post ref jan. I am against insulting anyone, mainly because I don't think it makes anything better. It is not even effective and the only thing that accomplishes is to bring more hate from the other side.
However, that is just me and I realize a lot of people feel differently and would get some sort of relief from badmouthing. In the interest of keeping everyone on board and along the lines suggested by dirouz, I wouldn't mind accepting both of your examples as legal. However sometimes people go even further than your example number 1 and say something to the effect of:
"Whoever believes in X is a piece of S..." and specially when you know a whole bunch of members believe in X, whether it is Islam, Bahaism, Christianity, or whatever.
I think your number 2 example is definitely ok, your number 1 example is gray area that could get a pass, but my example is a definite insult and if reported it should be dealt with.

 

[footballeirani]

Harsh criticism of ideas should be allowed but I am against insulting the followers of any given ideology.

For instance if you have a problem with the Jewish faith, go ahead and criticize it as much as you want, but you would be crossing the line when you start insulting the followers and provoking other members.

 

[Pooya]

there is nothing wrong in asking question, nothing wrong in saying was Mohammad really a prophet but the min. you say the line below you are insulting EVERYONE who believes in it. ISP policy is clear on this, you can NOT insult members.

Posted by Keyvan_Pars
Any mother fucker that believes that mamad from a bisavad savage arab became a person who wrote that cheap science fiction book (ghoraan) which is copied from Torat which itself is copied from Avesta is a prophet or a special person NEEDS TO GET FOHSHED AT.

if, anyone who thinks the above quote is OK and normal i would like to hear from them.

 

[IranZamin]

Fair enough. I changed my mind after seeing the part in bold.

 

[masoudA]

Thinkpad -
Should someone get banned if they say Communism is the stupidest idea mankind ever came up with ? it's a direct insult of an idealogy. Based on your definition people should be banned insulting communism. But it does not stop there - let's move from insult to criticizing. Many moslems claim insulted when their beliefs are criticized or even challenged - why because they have no logical answers, therefore they try to silent all challenges. As a result - the much needed Islamic renaissance keeps being pushed farther and farther away. The problem starts when CHALLENGING IDEALOGIES OR BELIEFS = INSULTS.

 

[IranZamin]

Masoud, I agree that religious people often prefer to silence critics instead of debate them, but DV gave them a legitimate claim here by using the word Motherf**. He could have easily made his point without profane insults.

 

[deerouz]

Jeezuz. Keyvan every now and then loses it. I guess it wasn't unfair after all. Just using that sort of profanity on any forum would get you banned. That said, I hope the new rules are restricted to such extreme cases only.

 

[masoudA]

I agree - we can't have that kind of profanity on the forum.