Ignore function?

Official website announcements are posted in this forum.

If you have questions, suggestions, or need support or help with anything, please email [email protected].
boagie
Posts: 1021
Joined: October 13th, 2008, 7:50 am

Post by boagie »

Hi Y'all!

I believe the ignore button is a good idea but it is just to handy, one should have to go a little out of their way to effect the process. It should not be readily available to impluse. I went years at one sight without having to place anyone on ignore. When someone just will not let up or their postings are truely a wash, and it does no good to appeal to the mods perhaps they do not agree, that's ok, but to save a conflict from going full tilt the button is a good idea. I guess what I am saying is one should have to go through a process to ignore someone not just hit a button.
athena
Premium Member
Posts: 971
Joined: June 11th, 2009, 10:18 am

Post by athena »

boagie wrote:Hi Y'all!

I believe the ignore button is a good idea but it is just to handy, one should have to go a little out of their way to effect the process. It should not be readily available to impluse. I went years at one sight without having to place anyone on ignore. When someone just will not let up or their postings are truely a wash, and it does no good to appeal to the mods perhaps they do not agree, that's ok, but to save a conflict from going full tilt the button is a good idea. I guess what I am saying is one should have to go through a process to ignore someone not just hit a button.
Are you suggesting someone else be the authority over my decision to use the ignore button? I hope not. The process we go through should be a personal choice of action, shouldn't it? And I am strongly opposed to relying on authority to handle my personal affairs. That is for children. At what age do we become adults?

Exactly what is mature behavior?
born to master the art of love
athena
Premium Member
Posts: 971
Joined: June 11th, 2009, 10:18 am

Post by athena »

Belinda wrote:Athena is right. However there remains the difficulty of separating personal attacks from attacks on a person's dearly held ideas.The whole perception of one's identity can be bound up in some orthodoxy. The recent incidents when Muslims took offence when Muhammad was ridiculed illustrate this. Christians are much more tolerant to ridicule than Muslims, poor old tolerant Christians!

The only way out of the dilemma seems to me to be a sort of elevated paternalism towards the fixedly orthodox, as if they are not entirely responsible for their own ideas, like mentally ill people.I don't enjoy this as I am liberal by nature.

This is one reason I feel at ease in a forum like this where philosophy rules okay either in its orthodox form or in its organic form.

Here's a hug for DeMeriden for pointing out the difference.
I find what you say quite agreeable. I think the distinction between "personal attacks from attacks on a person's dearly held ideas". Is clearly the subject of the post. When the subject of a post is obvious another poster, it is not the subject under discussion. Using offensive phrasing when addressing a poster, is clearly a deliberate dig at the person. The differences seem like day and night to me.
born to master the art of love
boagie
Posts: 1021
Joined: October 13th, 2008, 7:50 am

Post by boagie »

athena,

No, I am not suggesting that anyone but the associate in question have authority, just that it perhaps should not be so readily available to impluse. Perhaps you should have to go to your profile and work from there, just a little less available to impluse.
Belinda
Premium Member
Posts: 13818
Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Post by Belinda »

I think the distinction between "personal attacks from attacks on a person's dearly held ideas". Is clearly the subject of the post. When the subject of a post is obvious another poster, it is not the subject under discussion. Using offensive phrasing when addressing a poster, is clearly a deliberate dig at the person. The differences seem like day and night to me.
(Athena)

I agree . However, I don't think you have commented on the possibility that both philosophy and religion are often close to a person's self image, almost for some people Are the self image. Personally, I believe that we should allow ourselves the freedom to criticise any belief or point of order in a spirit of 'if you cannot be objective about a topic beware of having your feelings hurt'.

My guess is that some people will find their way to the philosophyclub because their idea of the nature of philosophy is that philosophy is a way to express religious devotion. How may this sort of poster be answered kindly?
boagie
Posts: 1021
Joined: October 13th, 2008, 7:50 am

Post by boagie »

Belinda,


"How may this sort of poster be answered kindly?"

This should be obvious I think to all, a philosophy site is not a santuary for unfounded ideas. One might ask what on earth is someone doing here that in fact cannot tolerate their beliefs being chanllenged. They are simply in the wrong place,no need to apologize, it is their mistake.
User avatar
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
The admin formerly known as Scott
Posts: 5765
Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
Contact:

Post by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes »

Belinda wrote:My guess is that some people will find their way to the philosophyclub because their idea of the nature of philosophy is that philosophy is a way to express religious devotion. How may this sort of poster be answered kindly?
We can respond to them by politely critiquing their arguments after careful consideration and politely and genuinely asking them followup questions, without sarcasm or ridicule. This is a place for open-minded, civil philosophical debate. If a person is so zealous that they do not like being questioned about their beliefs then they probably will not like it here, but if instead of civilly responding to the civil, philosophical arguments with more civil counterarguments they respond with any type of angry, offensive ad hominem arguments or otherwise off topic replies they will be warned and banned. Namely, please review rules 2 and 5 of the forum rules for more on this.
My entire political philosophy summed up in one tweet.

"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."

I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
nameless
Posts: 1230
Joined: May 13th, 2008, 9:06 pm
Location: Here/Now

Post by nameless »

The 'ignore' function works nicely.
The one ignored has posted so much irrational and illogical nonsense that it makes my head hurt just to read it.
The air is already sweeter!
Thanx!
athena
Premium Member
Posts: 971
Joined: June 11th, 2009, 10:18 am

Post by athena »

Belinda wrote:
I think the distinction between "personal attacks from attacks on a person's dearly held ideas". Is clearly the subject of the post. When the subject of a post is obvious another poster, it is not the subject under discussion. Using offensive phrasing when addressing a poster, is clearly a deliberate dig at the person. The differences seem like day and night to me.
(Athena)

I agree . However, I don't think you have commented on the possibility that both philosophy and religion are often close to a person's self image, almost for some people Are the self image. Personally, I believe that we should allow ourselves the freedom to criticise any belief or point of order in a spirit of 'if you cannot be objective about a topic beware of having your feelings hurt'.

My guess is that some people will find their way to the philosophyclub because their idea of the nature of philosophy is that philosophy is a way to express religious devotion. How may this sort of poster be answered kindly?
Look Missy, I am not talking about objecting to someone's argument. If you paid more attention to what I am saying, instead of just writing out of you own head, you would understand I am saying no should have to read post that are as offensive as this one. Sorry, but I can think of a no better way to get my point across.

The problem isn't a person's argument, but how that argument is made. Someone has attacked me so many times, I am avoiding this person, and that is regrettable, because it was stimulating responding to this person's argument. Unfortunately this person thinks there is nothing wrong with presenting his arguments in a very offensive way. The moral is- I stop reading when what a person says makes me feel bad. It is nice to come here without fear of how badly one person is going to make feel. And Missy, if you have any brains, you will agree these offensive words are personal attacks, and are not a subjective arguments.
Last edited by athena on August 1st, 2009, 11:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
born to master the art of love
athena
Premium Member
Posts: 971
Joined: June 11th, 2009, 10:18 am

Post by athena »

Scott wrote:
Belinda wrote:My guess is that some people will find their way to the philosophyclub because their idea of the nature of philosophy is that philosophy is a way to express religious devotion. How may this sort of poster be answered kindly?
We can respond to them by politely critiquing their arguments after careful consideration and politely and genuinely asking them followup questions, without sarcasm or ridicule. This is a place for open-minded, civil philosophical debate. If a person is so zealous that they do not like being questioned about their beliefs then they probably will not like it here, but if instead of civilly responding to the civil, philosophical arguments with more civil counterarguments they respond with any type of angry, offensive ad hominem arguments or otherwise off topic replies they will be warned and banned. Namely, please review rules 2 and 5 of the forum rules for more on this.
Wow, now that is the path to self improvement. I am afraid I fall way short of the ideal you stated, and I hope you repeat it often, calling me back to the path I want to follow.

This is the way to democracy with liberty/ Imagine what a wonderful reality we would have if the majority in our society were aware of what Scott is saying and took it to heart. My grandmother actually lived with people who lived by the standard Scott has set. I mean her generation was so focused on human dignity and honor, that they had a powerful profound effect on all those around them.

I think it is time for me to make a donation, because Scott you are doing what our society desperately needs. If all of us would create a society around Scott's advise, we will realize how awesome democracy with liberty can be.
born to master the art of love
User avatar
Juice
Posts: 1996
Joined: May 8th, 2009, 10:24 pm

Post by Juice »

How does one allow nonentities to influence a real entity to the point that it creates a physical reaction?

The appeal of the internet and the nonphysical interactions it allows is the purpose of its appeal.

It seems oxymoronic to allow this medium which has no real physical identity to effect one in such a way that it manifests itself as reality.

For all I know I could be interacting with myself. If I tell myself to jump from a bridge using this medium should I take it seriously?
When everyone looks to better their own future then the future will be better for everyone.

An explanation of cause is not a justification by reason.
C. S. Lewis

Fight the illusion!
Belinda
Premium Member
Posts: 13818
Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Post by Belinda »

I endorse that, Athena. I myself remember my father who had that sort of tolerant, kindly and mildly questioning personality, a gentle Protestant Christian whose faith probably supported him through terrible times of war.
athena
Premium Member
Posts: 971
Joined: June 11th, 2009, 10:18 am

Post by athena »

Juice wrote:How does one allow nonentities to influence a real entity to the point that it creates a physical reaction?

The appeal of the internet and the nonphysical interactions it allows is the purpose of its appeal.

It seems oxymoronic to allow this medium which has no real physical identity to effect one in such a way that it manifests itself as reality.

For all I know I could be interacting with myself. If I tell myself to jump from a bridge using this medium should I take it seriously?
I don't think you are being fully honest with yourself. If you didn't get more out of this than you get out of talking yourself in the mirror, you would not be doing it.

What we have here are real emotional and intellectual people and this is far from being nonentities. I notice you use a military symbol. Perhaps dehumanizing others is more complete for you than some of the rest of us?
born to master the art of love
User avatar
Juice
Posts: 1996
Joined: May 8th, 2009, 10:24 pm

Post by Juice »

Athena-You are typing thoughts on a computer which for all intent and purpose is not a real person. There is also the probability that most people here do not know eachother outside this medium.

It is a completely mental exercise, no test, no grade, just words on a screen which have no physical identity. It cannot hurt anyone. So when one believes they have been hurt by it then that too is "mental".

Now excuse me I am engaged in the torture of some Taliban on another site. :lol:
When everyone looks to better their own future then the future will be better for everyone.

An explanation of cause is not a justification by reason.
C. S. Lewis

Fight the illusion!
Post Reply

Return to “Forum Announcements”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021