That's not the case, Spiral.Spiral Out wrote:The analogy is quite accurate and sufficient. Nobody's freedoms are being transgressed upon by the rule. The rule makes perfect sense and is functional and relevant to this site's goals.
Sorry you cannot understand this. If it were a real issue then there would be far more members arguing this case. You're the only one who it matters this much to, which indicates a highly subjective and individual concern. That's fine, but Scott isn't going to change the rule.
As I said before, there is very good reason you're still here. It's because we all know this site is the best philosophy site on the internet, hands down. I've looked around at the other philosophy sites. Not one of them comes close to the level of thought and care that has gone into the design and structure of this site.
People are "afraid" of Scott. If you would read the comments, you'll see how much people wish to confront Scott - let's just say, they probably would rather confront their childhood fears first. Someone went as far as to call it draconian... it's really that bad. People don't try to change out of fear of losing what little privileges they have. Not because nobody cares about this. It's just not worth it to them to fight - nothing probably will be worth it, hence people's lives were taken away back in the ancient days for fighting the man in power. It's something you can't expect people to deal with in this day and age. I'm one of the few here that has the bravery to stand against this man's rules because I know he is wrong about them - that his rules are based on his own imagination, rather than the people's personal issues. I have explained this quite a lot throughout this thread, so I wish for you to take that into humble consideration.
Scott's rule has no reason behind it. It's only about him, in this case. If it was about us, the rule wouldn't exist, hence nobody is bothered by color-text so far. So why does this rule exist still, if nobody is apparently bothered by color-text? It exists, because it's dogmatic and insensible. It exists, because Scott doesn't want to change or accept that this rule is old and out-dated - and will never have a real purpose.
Discussing with Scott on this matter, is the same result as discussing with a racist, a sexist or a feminist. It's idolatry, not rationality. Power before people. Even though it's the people that grant them the power to begin with - biting the hand that feeds.