On rewarding civility

[Flail]

Civility should not be rewarded in debate.

[McCulloch]

Civility should not be rewarded in debate.

We really should not debate that here, but there is a talent, difficult for many, of being able to disagree and to voice your disagreement without being uncivil and rude. That rare talent should be rewarded and highly praised.

[Flail]

Civility is fine and admirable I suppose but I do not think it should be a goal for reward. If we reward civility we might as well reward 'popularity'....and if popularity is the goal, authentic debate suffers....much the same as it does with inane quotes from Holy books and such.....the goal here is the free exchange of ideas without censorship or condemnation....being civil should be expected...not rewarded....in my opinion.

[otseng]

Moderator note:

The above posts were originally posted in 2007 Most Civil Debater. I've moved the posts out into a separate thread so that this can be dicussed without affecting the nomination thread.

[theleftone]

being civil should be expected...not rewarded....in my opinion.

I would suggest civility be expected, but also encouraged. And I see the reward as doing such, even if to a small degree.

[otseng]

Civility is fine and admirable I suppose but I do not think it should be a goal for reward. If we reward civility we might as well reward 'popularity'....and if popularity is the goal, authentic debate suffers....much the same as it does with inane quotes from Holy books and such.....the goal here is the free exchange of ideas without censorship or condemnation....being civil should be expected...not rewarded....in my opinion.

Yes, being civil is expected here. And if everyone that participated here were equally civil, then rewarding civility would be meaningless. However, posters here are definitely not equally civil.

As with anything, what you reward shows what is the goal that you're trying to achieve. And the goal of this forum is to be the most civil and respectful forum on the internet to debate Christianity. So, actually, we need to reward civility.

[Fallibleone]

Civility is fine and admirable I suppose but I do not think it should be a goal for reward. If we reward civility we might as well reward 'popularity'....and if popularity is the goal, authentic debate suffers....much the same as it does with inane quotes from Holy books and such.....the goal here is the free exchange of ideas without censorship or condemnation....being civil should be expected...not rewarded....in my opinion.

I agree that in an ideal world the practicing of civility would be a foregone conclusion and so it would be unnecessary to reward it. However, I don't think that the current situation is one of default civility. We can see many examples of posts which either directly or indirectly take pops at forum members whose views are different or unpalateable. In such a climate, might it not be worthwhile to recognise and reward those who do try to remain civil in these circumstances? Perhaps if they are recognised, and others who post here have a desire to be recognised also, civility will eventually become the norm. I don't know, just a thought.

[Flail]

From the Bible

Proverbs 21:23 "Whoso keepeth his mouth and his tongue, keepeth his soul from troubles."

From Emerson

"Whosover would be a man, would be a non-conformist."

Civility is good...rewarding it in debate waters down the intensity....

Nothing I post is personal to anyone....just my opinions....and I realize that I have little knowledge but lots of opinions...which I am ready to change upon adequate persuasion.

[McCulloch]

Civility is good...rewarding it in debate waters down the intensity.

But the real art of civil debating is to find a way to express your disagreement with the ideas being presented without being uncivil yet without compromise. It is a difficult art and should be rewarded and praised.

[Furrowed Brow]

Lack of civility is not intellectual argument. If can be bullying, mocking, abuse etc, and such it leads an argument into a political arena more suited for the despatch box. Lack of civility deflects from the logic of an argument. One can hide the weakness of one’s own argument, and fail to express clearly the failings of one's opponents. Also I think civility allows the meek room to express their views without being bulldozed out the way by uncivil rhetoric.

I say civility should be rewarded. And I'm going to give a kicking to anyone who disagrees.