Don't attempt to shape the Forum to your expectations

[Zzyzx]

.
This Forum has been operating for over ten years, is owned and Administered by a Christian and very capable debater, has many long-term members, has well established Forum Rules and Guidelines by which you are expected and required to abide. It has established Admin and Moderator policies and practices.

If you think that the Forum is wrong or biased or unfair – or that the rules are just suggestions to follow if convenient, (or that the Forum should adapt to your wishes) you are welcome to go elsewhere that is more to your liking or develop your own web page and forum in which you can set the rules.

Here we have a very "level playing field" where no theistic position is given preferential treatment, where ranting and preaching in debate sub-forums is disallowed, where civility is of primary importance and where claims are expected to be substantiated. If this is not to your liking kindly do not waste our time whining and complaining or derailing threads with inappropriate comments – just leave in peace.

[Neatras]

I would at least like to comment that this covers everything except changes to rules. The Suggestions component of the subforums is wholly capable of creating an environment for individuals to voice concerns about what constitutes rules violations, but this does not immediately entitle one to devalue an active, existing rule. The OP makes a very clear-cut case that fighting the rules without justification, or disrespecting the authority of the forum owner, is grounds to be dismissed.

To all:
If you believe you can offer tips to make the site better for everyone, make suggestions in the appropriate subforum. If the suggestion is scrutinized and discarded, take that in stride and operate within the boundaries instated by the owner and the moderators.

[Korah]

[Replying to post 1 by Zzyzx]
I wasn't born yesterday,
And have been around DC&R long enough to know that Z is right, nothing is going to change here. Yet I have been surprised lately to see how many theists with extreme views and/or extreme ways of expressing "mainstream" views have been proliferating around here without (so far) getting banned or (in most cases) even placed "Under probation" (and in which category I nevertheless see continued flouting of the rules).
Sure, I myself may at times seem like the "poster child" for rebellion around here and I get lots of warnings, but (so far) nothing I perceive as any underhanded or obtuse way of getting rid of me. I seem to be able to get away with teasing of the powers-that-be here as (Im)moderators. But by that I don't mean that they are unfair or necessarily hostile to any viewpoint, just that they do bar expression of certain points of view if stated indelicately, do repel personal slanders and such, and won't allow theistic "preaching". There may be instances where non-theists seem to be given a free hand not allowed to theists, but this is probably mostly because the non-theists "naturally" are not inclined to cite "authorities" that are faith-based (e. g., no one quotes the Communist Manifesto, Mein Kampf, nor the more blatant New Atheist rants). Theists in contrast may feel themselves morally bound to cite as authoritative faith-based documents starting of course with the Bible and all Bible-based theologies whether Roman Catholic (but excluding, I guess, any bar on such ostensibly reason-based systems as Thomism), Calvinist, Fundamentalist, or Pentecostal, or any confession, catechism, sermon, or prayers stemming therefrom.
And let's be frank. Any number of questionnaires and other studies have shown atheists are smarter than theists. I can attest from personal experience that any group from Mensa on upwards in high-IQ exclusivity reveals fewer and fewer religionists and ever more predominance of atheism, agnosticism, or just plain indifference to anything about religion. Do keep in mind that these FACTS do not in themselves prove anything one way or the other about truths about God or worship of God. It could be, for example, that atheists are just more closed to experiences that lower IQ people readily recognize as in truth God's handiwork. High IQ people may be simply of a personality type hostile to religion, as Myers-Briggs INTJ people tend to be. There could be some determinism or karma at work. But in any case, with them (the non-religious) being smarter, they're by nature more in tune with "the rules" here and less likely to do stupid things that get them banned.
So keep an open mind and join in the -- I almost said "fun". Be that as it may, I say, "Carry on!"

[Mesopatamia]

[Replying to Korah]



Honestly, i think it just has more to do with the fact that some people are only comfortable approaching the world through means that involve rational and intellect while others use both intellect and spiritual to interpret the world, and yet others who only use spiritual to interpret the world with little to no intellect.

Personally, being a person of faith does not make me of low intelligence, tho. I am not a genius, but I do have an IQ of 134, which is pretty respectable. I do think, however that you are right in saying that most atheists are of very high intelligence. They do approach the world through pure intellect. However, only approaching the world through pure intellect can be just as much of a blind spot as someone who only approaches the world just spiritually and not intellectually.

However, I do know how you feel though and why you said what you said.

[Korah]

[Replying to post 3 by Mesopatamia]
Well, M,
You're new here so you haven't encountered (I suppose) very many of my posts. I've only been heavily active here in DC&R just recently, however, so you'll find my name popping up in many recently active threads. (One odd place to look for me is in "Random Ramblings" within the "General discussions" category in the thread "Only Adult in the Room?" Therein you will find an informal "head-to-head" between Z (the Mod who shunted my thread from "Christianity and Apologetics" almost the moment my OP entered the lists. Z works to shoot down my apologia for Christianity. I discuss "High IQ" groups there in some detail from my own life experience. Yes, my IQ is higher than yours, but not by much.) I am a Lutheran now, if that counts for you as a Christian, where I attend every Sunday.
Yeah, last year I got discouraged trying to work around Z to get my Christian Higher Criticism out here at DC&R, so I put it off until this year. Still have not got a hearing on this, because no one is willing to debate me except Z and he's not the "opponent" I want. As I have told him many times, "I don't think I can debate meaningfully with an ignostic, whatever that is. Logical Empiricist, the philosophy whose meaning refutes itself as meaningless?"
Some are confused by my name here (I'm Adam on Theology Web and BiblicalCriticism (Peter Kirby's website.) No, I'm not female (as implicitly comes out in many of my posts and explicitly when I am confessing the only thing that is on a teenage boy's mind!), but I chose my name "Korah" here as the most frequent transliteration of that Old Testament aristocrat who opposed Moses. I'm a rebel, too, still at 73 years of age. Don't mess with Texas! (Actually I only visited there in 1961, my FATHER was born there--but in the Panhandle, and I grew up on a farm in Healdsburg California with all the other transplanted Okies.)

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 3 by Mesopatamia]

[Replying to post 4 by Korah]

Is intelligence level somehow related to the OP? There is no minimum IQ required to join the Forum and there is no assurance that claimed or assumed high score is related to successful debating (as we see repeatedly).

It does not require high IQ to learn and follow simple Forum Rules and Guidelines -- OR to learn to debate issues rather than personalities.

Those who do not fare well in debate, regardless of intelligence level, often attempt to excuse themselves by blaming the Forum and/or its Administrators, Moderators, Rules, or other debaters. Perhaps they do not realize how transparent such excuses are to readers and debaters.

[Korah]

[Replying to post 5 by Zzyzx]
Your #5 states it responds to my #4, but the relevance of IQ I explained at some length in my Post #2, not #4. Put baldly I tried to explain that Christians get more readily discouraged or banned here because of the fact that religious people tend to have lower IQs than atheists do. (Fortunately the Mods implicitly recognize this and seem to put up with more guff from people they can recognize as simply stupid and confused. I guess I can take it as a compliment that I have been placed "Under Probation"--I'm regarded as easily capable of behaving better.)
I did not bring up the IQ issue to cause trouble, but rather the reverse, to explain why this site works as it does, quite fairly, but seeming to be biased against religious people because the latter post stupider things. Stupid people post stupid stuff and are less capable of learning and obeying rules. That's not DC&R's fault, though it may be the fault of High IQ making people less capable (and not just from pride) of accepting religion. Their minds are programmed a different way?

[Zzyzx]

.

Put baldly I tried to explain that Christians get more readily discouraged or banned here because of the fact that religious people tend to have lower IQs than atheists do.

It seems very simplistic (and incorrect) to claim that Forum imbalance and unwillingness to follow Forum Rules and Guidelines reflect ". . . the fact that religious people tend to have lower IQs than atheists do" OR "Stupid people post stupid stuff and are less capable of learning and obeying rules."

Although studies show a slight difference in IQ between religious vs. non-religious that is simply a statistical average (a minor one), and has no bearing on individual examples.

I guess I can take it as a compliment that I have been placed "Under Probation"--I'm regarded as easily capable of behaving better.

Some people regard Probation, Suspension and Banishment as "complements." Perhaps they seek martyrdom (or a way out after failed debate attempts – and/or a way to blame others or the Forum).


Now, what does any of that have to do with the OP "Don't attempt to shape the Forum to your expectations"?

[Korah]

[Replying to post 7 by Zzyzx]
You're such an expert on words, Z,
That I have to ask you why you "corrected" my "complIiment" to the wildly different meaning "complEment". Are you slyly acknowledging that my trashing of my fellow Christians as "stupid" succeeds in filling the "ideology" here? YOU dare not say it because you're with the non-theist "opposition", but if I a CHRISTIAN acknowledge that Christians are by-and-large stupider than atheists, and this understanding of the facts serves as an apologia for why this forum seems more hostile to Christians than to atheists, but is actually quite justified in its disciplining, then I have "completed" the ideological justification for DC&R and how it works in practice.
Happy to have been of service.

Psst...how many points does this get me towards getting off probation?

[Zzyzx]

.

[Replying to post 7 by Zzyzx]
You're such an expert on words, Z,
That I have to ask you why you "corrected" my "complIiment" to the wildly different meaning "complEment".

My "correction" was not due to any expertise, but was an error due to oversight on my part. Apologies. I am far from being an expert on words.

Are you slyly acknowledging that my trashing of my fellow Christians as "stupid" succeeds in filling the "ideology" here?

I do NOT think or say that Christians are stupid / low intelligence – and do NOT agree with any such statement.

YOU dare not say it because you're with the non-theist "opposition", but if I a CHRISTIAN acknowledge that Christians are by-and-large stupider than atheists,

According to Forum Rules no one is permitted to make blanket statements or ANY negative statements toward an individual or group.

and this understanding of the facts serves as an apologia for why this forum seems more hostile to Christians than to atheists, but is actually quite justified in its disciplining, then I have "completed" the ideological justification for DC&R and how it works in practice.

I strongly disagree with this conjecture. Admin and Moderators do NOT assume that Christians are of lower intelligence than Non-Christians / Non-Theists for any reason.

Happy to have been of service.

It may well be a disservice to all concerned and disrespectful of the Forum.