Modding stuff lately....

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

Whether they explain or not, people are going to piss and moan.

There's not a win situation with this board, SD and everyone else could step down as mod and people would complain about the next mod within a month or two (or less) even if he were completely unbiased. Rinse and repeat.

While that's true, and this thread is a prime example, explaining actions is a hallmark of good communication. If no one had explained the FN thing, that thread would be 10 times longer right now since most people assumed he'd been boxed for defending his wife from a trolling comment, while the troller got away with it.

[CamEdwards]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Cam: You're working way too hard to make this about gay slurs.

Nah, I'm just trying to amuse myself at this point. I do think there's a double standard at work here, but I find it funny rather than something that makes me angry.

[oliegirl]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

Nah, I'm just trying to amuse myself at this point. I do think there's a double standard at work here, but I find it funny rather than something that makes me angry.

At least you have something to talk about on your show this afternoon...how one person can give all conservatives a bad name

[saldana]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

most people assumed he'd been boxed for defending his wife from a trolling comment, while the troller got away with it.

the troll did get away with it.

[CamEdwards]

Originally Posted by oliegirl

At least you have something to talk about on your show this afternoon...how one person can give all conservatives a bad name

Nah, I talked about Bill O'Reilly yesterday.

[oliegirl]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

Nah, I talked about Bill O'Reilly yesterday.

HA! Good one!

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Chris

Is the leeway defined as personal attacks? Intensity of opinion?

Interesting and fair question (especially since you would probably have had to read my mind to know what I meant since I failed to define it at all).

I think there's occasionally stuff that goes under "personal attacks" that would qualify, but that isn't where I would say the majority of the leeway I see falls.

Mostly, I'm referring to the blatant trolling that takes place here by members of the left. It's consistent, it borders on constant, and it's definitely perpetual.

Bear in mind, I'm probably one of the leading proponents of the "ban all political threads" philosophy here. I'm active in them, I'm certainly not bashful in them, but I do not believe they serve much purpose here. And, relevant to the topic at hand, the origin of the majority of them is trolling. They aren't designed to generate meaningful discussion, they aren't meant to obtain additional food for thought, they're designed to bash one group & the purpose of that bashing is to create controversy, dissension, and often as not just a good old fashioned flame war. Well damn, isn't trying to start a flame war part of the essence of trolling? That's where I'm coming from with that, that a lot of this stuff

But it's not only tolerated, it's downright accepted. And I believe that a primary reason for the "tolerance" and "acceptance" is that the perpetrators are, most often, from the far left of the political spectrum. (Okay, talk to the camera moment for my biggest fans here: I did NOT say "all" or "always", I said "most often". There's a few that sit on my side of the aisle who do it too.)

That plays a big part in why I don't feel much restraint is needed when I comment -- what I'm doing in political threads is answering damn trolls. Yeah, I know, it's generally better not to feed them, but in the absence of adequate moderation control, at some point most people give in to the urge to respond.
It's like "internet human nature" or something, there are some who can totally control the need to respond 100% of the time but I believe most people would agree that those are rare.

Most of the ill-well towards me, best I can figure, comes from my politically oriented postings (or socio-political if you want to split the hair) Fair enough, because that's the root of 90%+ of the people who I've got on ignore too.

I don't come here wanting to know that there's people here who have views I find intolerable. I don't come here wanting to find people I can't stomach the sight or sound of (yeah, like anybody thinks I've got a shortage of those from day to day, internet not withstanding). It doesn't have to be all about FOF or computer games.

You wanna tell me about your kids? Have at it. You wanna talk about how drunk you are right now? Cool, wish I was too. Want to get advice on buying plasma TV's, scented candles, patio furniture, or styrofoam cups? Good place to ask AFAIC, if I know the answer I'll try to help if I can. But for the love of Pete, WTF is there such a compulsion to go down the two roads that are generally less traveled for very good reason? Everybody over the age of 3 knows that politics and religion are conversational third rails -- touch them & die.
(Note to my fan club: I'm not suggesting, recommending, or threatening death to anybody. It's a reference to the fatal nature of touching the third rail of an "electrical power distribution system for trains that uses an exposed conductor")

But on a regular & consistent basis, that's where things head here -- straight for the third rail(s) just as surely as a politician irresistably gravitates toward money. And so you get a near perfect storm scenario -- A thread that is started with full knowledge & intention of starting a flame war. On a topic that is known far & wide to be highly flammable. Add me (and others, but I'll take my fair share of the description) who is rarely inclined to allow the intolerable to go unchallenged/unanswered. I do the exact same thing if the situation arises in "real life". I subscribe to the basic philosophy that the 'net is basically an extension of "real life", most akin to the telephone. So it's a safe bet that I'm going to react here the same way -- I'm going to challenge behaviors that I find intolerable. Failing to do so is too closely akin to acceptance or approval IMO, and pretty obviously if something is intolerable then acceptance or approval is the last thing you want to imply.
(that last bit seems kinda like a "duh" statement to me, but I've sucked at not explaining everything today, so I spelled it out just in case).

And right back to the matter of "leeway" -- that's most frequently the leeway given to blantant trolling from the left to be allowed/accepted while from another quarter (say, non-political at all) would get squashed for the trolling it is. So you get trolling from the left, responded to by me/others, and then there's this great hue & cry for the heads of those who dared to respond. Bluntly stated: Fuck that shit. If you're going to let people pour gasoline & throw dynamite onto a otherwise safe campfire, don't blame the subsequent explosion on the marshmellow roast. And the answer to preventing the explosion is NOT to ban marshmellow roasts or even campfire. The problem is the gang with the dynamite & the cans of super unleaded. (Which cuts right to the root of my "feedback" to SD at the beginning of the thread. I finally snapped about his failure/unwillingness to control the dynamite & gasoline gang. It isn't the first time he's heard me voice my feelings on the subject, although it's maybe the most blunt & definitely the most public. Pretty much the only thing I regret at this point, doing it publically instead of privately. But when I read "but you can use this thread if you want to vent" my immediate reaction was "Vent? You're damned right I want to vent" and what followed was a vent that had been a long time coming. I want him to do a good job here because I believe he can do a good job here, but that only makes me exponentially angrier when he doesn't.)

Okay, whew. More than you asked, but as I typed an answer, it seemed like that a lot of it was part of/relevant to the answer. If I explain what I was referring to, I might as well go ahead & explain where that's coming from too.

[Desnudo]

Help me, I'm being crushed by the post above me!

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

Help me, I'm being crushed by the post above me!

Sorry about that Des, I didn't see you standing there

(It was f'n loooooong. It wasn't intended that way but I guess I figured I'd try to avoid some of the inevitable/obvious questions by answering them right along with the post that would prompt them. Truth of the matter, I didn't realize how long it was myself until I saw it after posting. I think combining all that together probably just cost me a little post count)

[rkmsuf]

I can't fathom writing that much. Like dude, nobody cares.

Ok, I can't speak for nobody. I don't care.

And you don't care that I don't care.

Thread over.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

I can't fathom writing that much. Like dude, nobody cares.

You would tend to think so, wouldn't you?

But given the amount of energy some like to devote to villifying me here, somebody must care in some way, no matter how twisted it may seem.

Besides, I'm just waiting for a couple of returned calls & an email, I can't do much that's more productive until those come in anyway. I mean, yeah, I could empty that trashcan or finally put those folders in the filing cabinet, but ... even this was preferrable to those options.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

I can't fathom writing that much. Like dude, nobody cares.

Ok, I can't speak for nobody. I don't care.

And you don't care that I don't care.

Thread over.

BLANK!

If you can't speak for nobody, then you do care? Or am I confused?

[st.cronin]

Tom Brady

[Schmidty]

I thought this thread was going to be about moderation discussion, not whether or not Jon has a vagina.

[rkmsuf]

is

[Raiders Army]

FWIW, I think most of the conservative bashing that's been done on this board is par for the course. Just like most of the conservative bashing that was done in the news for the past six years has been par for the course.

#1: We've had a Republican president since SkyDog took over.
#2: General consensus in the media and in general is to bash the President.
#3: 1+2=3

That's why I think there may be a liberal slant to this messageboard. Let the Dems win the White House in 2008 and we'll see what happens then.

What terrifies me is that I agreed with Isquiddi in the Mens' rights thread this morning.

[saldana]

not to belittle Jon's left vs right issue, because i really dont have an opinion on it, but how about we condense the entirety of his 3 page post to just: How about we try an put an end to trolling. period. no matter which side of the political spectrum it comes from, or how many posts they have, or how long they have been a member. How about we just use some standard civility in the way we talk to each other....i know that at times things i have posted have bothered people, and when that happens, I immediately apologize and stop whatever it is that i was doing...anything else is trolling, and i just dont understand how/why it is tolerated from any direction.

[Desnudo]

faster at posting than rkmsuf

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

faster at posting than rkmsuf

dammit I want a recount. he retro timestamp bugged me.

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

I can't fathom writing that much. Like dude, nobody cares.

Ok, I can't speak for nobody. I don't care.

And you don't care that I don't care.

Thread over.

I believe this thread may be your Moby Dick, Master of the Succinct.

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by saldana

not to belittle Jon's left vs right issue, because i really dont have an opinion on it, but how about we condense the entirety of his 3 page post to just: How about we try an put an end to trolling. period. no matter which side of the political spectrum it comes from, or how many posts they have, or how long they have been a member. How about we just use some standard civility in the way we talk to each other....i know that at times things i have posted have bothered people, and when that happens, I immediately apologize and stop whatever it is that i was doing...anything else is trolling, and i just dont understand how/why it is tolerated from any direction.

I'm sorry for calling you a n00b.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

I believe this thread may be your Moby Dick, Master of the Succinct.

I thought I was the Black Pope of Love and Tolerance.

Master of the Succinct is good too.

[Desnudo]

I was going to call you Zen Master for your "is" post.

[st.cronin]

!

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

I thought I was the Black Pope of Love and Tolerance.

Master of the Succinct is good too.

Some mod should give you a unique title like that...or maybe something shorter that references smurfs.

[JeeberD]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

or maybe something shorter that references smurfs.

Hmmmm...Vanity Smurf?

[Bee]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

Some mod should give you a unique title like that...or maybe something shorter that references smurfs.

Angry Smurf would be my suggestion...

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

Some mod should give you a unique title like that...or maybe something shorter that references smurfs.

only if it references stuff I did to smurfette and how she loved it

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

!

*

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by saldana

the troll did get away with it.

So does that mean we need a rule calling for an automatic boxing if you mention FN's wife in a derogatory way? Should we box everyone who speaks poorly about a former board member? I don't think we need to have a double standard for treating people differently just because two people on the board are members.

I'll admit Steve used a word (* included) I wouldn't use, and I could see if we had a rule against using that word or if we a had a rule against calling anyone a name that included an obscenity. But we don't.

As for Jon's speaking of a double standard, I think FN is another case of someone who has repeatedly broken board rules and doesn't get a banning. How many times do you need to get boxed before you earn yourself a lifetime achievement banning? Then of course we have the Jesse banning, which most rational people see as simply the flip side of the Capsicum banning. But I guess facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

I think we ever we get into this hissy fits over board moderation, all we do is here from the vocal majority -- the fact that the majority of forum members are quiet on the issue suggests to me that board moderation is just about right.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

*

troll

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

troll

Are you calling my wife an orifice?

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

Are you calling my wife an orifice?

he called her a baboon, thinks she's his wife.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by Schmidty

I thought this thread was going to be about moderation discussion, not whether or not Jon has a vagina.

After reading this thread, I'm ALMOST convinced that these two issues are one in the same...almost there.

[Daimyo]

JiMGA complaining of a moderation bias against him and conservatives is the best UIC (?) moment here since the whole "cocky and funny" hornsmaniac thread. I totally thought it was intended as sarcasm at first!

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

he called her a baboon, thinks she's his wife.

Also sums up this thread pretty well.

[st.cronin]

are you saying this thread really chaps your ass?

[WSUCougar]

I've always wondered this...in a baboon pack, when they gather around to mate and stuff, do they talk to each other in baboon-speak and say things like:

"Hey, Joe. Check out the sweet pink ass on THAT!"

[oliegirl]

Bear in mind, I'm probably one of the leading proponents of the "ban all political threads" philosophy here. I'm active in them, I'm certainly not bashful in them, but I do not believe they serve much purpose here. And, relevant to the topic at hand, the origin of the majority of them is trolling. They aren't designed to generate meaningful discussion, they aren't meant to obtain additional food for thought, they're designed to bash one group & the purpose of that bashing is to create controversy, dissension, and often as not just a good old fashioned flame war. Well damn, isn't trying to start a flame war part of the essence of trolling? That's where I'm coming from with that, that a lot of this stuff

So according to this statement, you are a troll. You post in political threads which according to you are an example of trolling...and beyond that, you admit to being "not bashful" in them. Your posts are more troll-like than many of the actual trolls that post here. You bash and insult the people who disagree with you more than just about anyone else here. I can't speak for anyone else here, but it seems to me that you often go so far over the line when trying to make your point that you have absolutley no chance of anyone having anything positive to say about you. And you bring it all on yourself...this thread, and more specifically, your posts in this thread is the perfect example.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by WSUCougar

I've always wondered this...in a baboon pack, when they gather around to mate and stuff, do they talk to each other in baboon-speak and say things like:

"Hey, Joe. Check out the sweet pink ass on THAT!"

Funny you should ask.

Big bottomed baboons make better mates

UK researchers have proved that the big-bottomed female baboons which male baboons find most sexually attractive are also the most successful at reproducing.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s256942.htm

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Chris, in all seriousness & complete sincerity -- if this board didn't have such a strong tendency to tolerate dozens who attack conservatives while allowing only a scant few conservatives the leeway to answer them just as strongly, I'd be happy enough to take my leave permanently.

In other words, I'd go away pretty readily and of my own accord, as long as the same percentage of the staunchest liberals who post with equal fervor for their viewpoints were gone too.

I won't disagree that I'm allowed a good bit of leeway to answer socio-political topics with passion. The problem is that too few other equally capable (and willing) conservatives have (or have any reason to believe they have) the same amount of leeway. That leaves quite literally dozens on the left with clear & consistent free reign that isn't equally afforded to the same number on the right.

Again, I'd have no issue at all with being boxed, banned, permabanned, exiled, or whatever term you choose IF every liberal who stepped over the same line got the same treatment. But that hasn't happened, it doesn't happen, nor do I believe for more than the slightest moment of faint forlorn hope it'll ever happen (for reasons I referenced in my initial post in this thread). Absent that equitable treatment, then I don't feel the slightest bit apologetic about being among the few conservatives here who have been allowed to reply in kind to the sacred cows of the left.

A true political patriot - prepared to sacrifice himself if he can take a few of the other side with him... Remind you of anything?

[rkmsuf]

you are all things baboon

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

are you saying this thread really chaps your ass?

More directly, I was saying this thread is ass. However, I feel like we're in a dual thread now. I like what we are doing with the space.

[saldana]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

So does that mean we need a rule calling for an automatic boxing if you mention FN's wife in a derogatory way?

again, i'm not defending anyone in particular...i didnt really even pay attention to when capsicum was here....my point is that civility is lacking...SteveW's post is merely the most recent example


and RA, i'm still not over it...i plan on sending you my shrink bills when i complete my therapy

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

More directly, I was saying this thread is ass. However, I feel like we're in a dual thread now. I like what we are doing with the space.

My socks that I am wearing don't match.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

you are all things baboon

Learn it. Know it. Live it.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

You would tend to think so, wouldn't you?

But given the amount of energy some like to devote to villifying me here, somebody must care in some way, no matter how twisted it may seem.

Besides, I'm just waiting for a couple of returned calls & an email, I can't do much that's more productive until those come in anyway. I mean, yeah, I could empty that trashcan or finally put those folders in the filing cabinet, but ... even this was preferrable to those options.

See this is the perceived problem: other than the comments in this thread by some, I haven't seen evidence of people trying to vilify you (although I haven't read all of the political threads, only those that seem to have interest / application to the situation over here).

From what I have seen you are somebody who is secure in what you believe, argue your points passionately, but see anybody who doesn't agree with you, or maybe cannot make their points as coherently or definitively as you, as being out to get you.

Some might be I suppose, but my guess is they just don't have the same opinions as you. Just my tuppence worth.

[oliegirl]

Originally Posted by Jari Rantanen's Shorts

See this is the perceived problem: other than the comments in this thread by some, I haven't seen evidence of people trying to vilify you (although I haven't read all of the political threads, only those that seem to have interest / application to the situation over here).

From what I have seen you are somebody who is secure in what you believe, argue your points passionately, but see anybody who doesn't agree with you, or maybe cannot make their points as coherently or definitively as you, as being out to get you.

Some might be I suppose, but my guess is they just don't have the same opinions as you. Just my tuppence worth.

I need an English translation for tuppence please

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

It's time that you either drop the personal agendas you have with certain posters or at least apply the rules evenly across the board.

Is this Jon I'm reading?

You've cut the liberal wing of this forum slack to infinity & beyond and I believe that you've done it in a misguided attempt to prove that you're not too conservative yourself.

Ah. There it is.

Here's a novel approach I'd suggest: Treat everybody on both sides of the aisle the same way. Period.

Should be happening anyway. I don't think it has been - I think the "liberals" have caught it in the shorts more as far as boxings and bannings go (and I say this as a conservative), but I think both sides ought to be receiving equal treatment regardless of what's come before.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Interesting and fair question (especially since you would probably have had to read my mind to know what I meant since I failed to define it at all).

I think there's occasionally stuff that goes under "personal attacks" that would qualify, but that isn't where I would say the majority of the leeway I see falls.

Mostly, I'm referring to the blatant trolling that takes place here by members of the left. It's consistent, it borders on constant, and it's definitely perpetual.

Bear in mind, I'm probably one of the leading proponents of the "ban all political threads" philosophy here. I'm active in them, I'm certainly not bashful in them, but I do not believe they serve much purpose here. And, relevant to the topic at hand, the origin of the majority of them is trolling. They aren't designed to generate meaningful discussion, they aren't meant to obtain additional food for thought, they're designed to bash one group & the purpose of that bashing is to create controversy, dissension, and often as not just a good old fashioned flame war. Well damn, isn't trying to start a flame war part of the essence of trolling? That's where I'm coming from with that, that a lot of this stuff

But it's not only tolerated, it's downright accepted. And I believe that a primary reason for the "tolerance" and "acceptance" is that the perpetrators are, most often, from the far left of the political spectrum. (Okay, talk to the camera moment for my biggest fans here: I did NOT say "all" or "always", I said "most often". There's a few that sit on my side of the aisle who do it too.)

That plays a big part in why I don't feel much restraint is needed when I comment -- what I'm doing in political threads is answering damn trolls. Yeah, I know, it's generally better not to feed them, but in the absence of adequate moderation control, at some point most people give in to the urge to respond.
It's like "internet human nature" or something, there are some who can totally control the need to respond 100% of the time but I believe most people would agree that those are rare.

Most of the ill-well towards me, best I can figure, comes from my politically oriented postings (or socio-political if you want to split the hair) Fair enough, because that's the root of 90%+ of the people who I've got on ignore too.

I don't come here wanting to know that there's people here who have views I find intolerable. I don't come here wanting to find people I can't stomach the sight or sound of (yeah, like anybody thinks I've got a shortage of those from day to day, internet not withstanding). It doesn't have to be all about FOF or computer games.

You wanna tell me about your kids? Have at it. You wanna talk about how drunk you are right now? Cool, wish I was too. Want to get advice on buying plasma TV's, scented candles, patio furniture, or styrofoam cups? Good place to ask AFAIC, if I know the answer I'll try to help if I can. But for the love of Pete, WTF is there such a compulsion to go down the two roads that are generally less traveled for very good reason? Everybody over the age of 3 knows that politics and religion are conversational third rails -- touch them & die.
(Note to my fan club: I'm not suggesting, recommending, or threatening death to anybody. It's a reference to the fatal nature of touching the third rail of an "electrical power distribution system for trains that uses an exposed conductor")

But on a regular & consistent basis, that's where things head here -- straight for the third rail(s) just as surely as a politician irresistably gravitates toward money. And so you get a near perfect storm scenario -- A thread that is started with full knowledge & intention of starting a flame war. On a topic that is known far & wide to be highly flammable. Add me (and others, but I'll take my fair share of the description) who is rarely inclined to allow the intolerable to go unchallenged/unanswered. I do the exact same thing if the situation arises in "real life". I subscribe to the basic philosophy that the 'net is basically an extension of "real life", most akin to the telephone. So it's a safe bet that I'm going to react here the same way -- I'm going to challenge behaviors that I find intolerable. Failing to do so is too closely akin to acceptance or approval IMO, and pretty obviously if something is intolerable then acceptance or approval is the last thing you want to imply.
(that last bit seems kinda like a "duh" statement to me, but I've sucked at not explaining everything today, so I spelled it out just in case).

And right back to the matter of "leeway" -- that's most frequently the leeway given to blantant trolling from the left to be allowed/accepted while from another quarter (say, non-political at all) would get squashed for the trolling it is. So you get trolling from the left, responded to by me/others, and then there's this great hue & cry for the heads of those who dared to respond. Bluntly stated: Fuck that shit. If you're going to let people pour gasoline & throw dynamite onto a otherwise safe campfire, don't blame the subsequent explosion on the marshmellow roast. And the answer to preventing the explosion is NOT to ban marshmellow roasts or even campfire. The problem is the gang with the dynamite & the cans of super unleaded. (Which cuts right to the root of my "feedback" to SD at the beginning of the thread. I finally snapped about his failure/unwillingness to control the dynamite & gasoline gang. It isn't the first time he's heard me voice my feelings on the subject, although it's maybe the most blunt & definitely the most public. Pretty much the only thing I regret at this point, doing it publically instead of privately. But when I read "but you can use this thread if you want to vent" my immediate reaction was "Vent? You're damned right I want to vent" and what followed was a vent that had been a long time coming. I want him to do a good job here because I believe he can do a good job here, but that only makes me exponentially angrier when he doesn't.)

Okay, whew. More than you asked, but as I typed an answer, it seemed like that a lot of it was part of/relevant to the answer. If I explain what I was referring to, I might as well go ahead & explain where that's coming from too.

file this under "WHY [POL] THREADS NEED THEIR OWN FORUM"

I think this is the first lengthy JiMG post that I have agreed with pretty much in its entirety (I got overwhelmed partway through and skimmed a bunch of it). Political threads really are generated LARGELY (not always, but largely) for the purpose of inciting flamewars, for bashing people and calling people names, for beating ones head against a wall. And this comes from the left as well as the right (although the majority of the posts are started by those on the left it is a definate fact that if the left was in power in this country we would see a lot more POL threads started by the right). It's because people like to vent their frustrations with the current system...be it left or right. The only difference is who is starting the threads, once the gloves come off in a POL thread, right and left hurl insulsts back and forth across the aisle equally. From "traitor" to "nazi" it happens all the time.

Politics and religion ARE the "third rail" of polite conversation. You'd never have most of these conversations at say a town picnic at an audible volume, so why are we having them here, in such a diverse community, at such a "volume" if you will. Discussing them IN PRIVATE with friends, or just going out to a bar and starting a political fistfight are really the only times you'd discuss these subjects. Which AGAIN is why I think Political/Religious (although this is far from the problem the political threads are) threads need their own "anything goes" forum. That way people have to seperately click to enter it, and acknowledge the "anything goes" aspect of it. And if people choose to ignore it then and the opinions of people in it, then so be it. And if they choose to play in it, they know that they will likely end up with a bloody nose. But then at least we won't have Political/Religious stuff spilling over cross-thread in the main forum and coloring our opinions of each other (unless we choose to go play in that forum).