A proposal on some things

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Edit: I'm going to ditch the majority of point 1 as it's not as much of an issue anymore and I let my biases cloud my objectivity. I will leave this though:

I'm going to be honest. Sometimes when I see a discussion going on that interests me, I get frustrated to see it locked (Unless people were getting at each other's throats or something). I also get frustrated when I hear the words "take it to PM." (Assuming non-hostilities) At this moment the point of any discussion is lost. The point of a forum is where anyone can give their opinion or viewpoint on whatever topic they choose. How can this be accomplished through private messaging? It can't. People cannot give their inputs to a wide audience and it is no longer an exchange of discussion which a forum promotes because it's narrowed to just two people. Even if a discussion is primarily between two people on a public thread, the point is that this allows other users to contribute their ideas. Many times I don't WANT to take it to PM because I don't want just one person's idea/opinion. I want EVERYONE'S thoughts. I know I'm not the only one here who thinks this too.

_________________

My second point is this: I believe there should be less rules on what we are not allowed to discuss. I know that CAA is allowing itself to have some leniency with theological discussions. But I want to see this totally develop into an eventual total dissolution of the rule. This means allowing topics such as theology and politics.

YES CAA has in the past had many issues with this, but CAA before is not CAA today. How can the members here prove that, for the most part, we can be mature and responsible in what we say if we have no opportunity to? Sure this is CAA: Christian Anime Alliance. And what's the first word? Christian! And I know for me, as a Christian, issues like theology and politics are extremely important to my faith. Things such as presidents, economics, or whatever are very political. But they are also very spiritual topics too. And personally because of this, I feel like if I cannot talk about things which are important to my faith in Christ, then I am not allowed to fully represent myself as a Christian on a board where the very first word in the title is "Christian". If you censor me from talking about these things, then you are censoring me from representing Christ in me. And that, I believe, is an extremely questionable practice for a forum such as CAA to do.

We're all different, broken, and messed up individuals. Yes we'll have disagreements and yes we'll get frustrated with each other. But that is life and part of life is having the opportunity for these frustrations so we can refine our ability to be merciful and loving towards others. Also, how can we grow if we are not challenged spiritually and mentally? Something like politics is extremely important when it comes to living out the Christian faith. I can attest to this. And if we want to help others grow and develop, then all these things need to be opened up and be allowed to be discussed about. And if this website is a Christian website, then we must be willing to pour into others and foster growth. Not just with our relationship with God, but EVERY part of our lives because our faith is tied to ALL of these parts of our lives. This is part of the Christian faith. And with such a diverse group of people here, there is no doubt that we can positively challenge one another. While the mods do their best to keep the peace and maintain a semblance order, they are not here to police or dictate us. They are here to make sure this is a safe environment where each person is both respectable as well as respected.

While these two points are not something I expect to end with immediate results, this is something I'm going to continually propose and promote because unlike all other sites I go to, I truly do love the community of this website. And I really do believe that CAA can make these alterations while still maintain its mission statement and do more. It just takes dedication from every single one of us here to decide to do our part.

[MxCake]

i agree

[Warrior4Christ]

Interesting proposal. I recognise the authority of the admins and moderators, and it's not exactly a democracy, but I'm sure they welcome suggestions to consider.

And lately I've been thinking and wish to propose that when this happens, threads ought to not get locked. Why should they? At what point does a thread become "derailed" of "off-topic"? Now of course if there's a thread relating to like... alarm clocks and the topic starts to heavily go into like.. cough medicine then of course that's really off-topic.

One disadvantage of letting threads go off-topic is that it's harder to track down that discussion later, since the thread title is totally unrelated.
But one disadvantage of locking it and starting a new thread for that is that the new thread may lose momentum which would have been in the old thread, and it might fizzle after two posts (forum dynamics may be tricky to predict).

[quote="Mr. SmartyPants (post: 1447619)"]YES CAA has in the past had many issues with this, but CAA before is not CAA today. How can the members here prove that, for the most part, we can be mature and responsible in what we say if we have no opportunity to? Sure this is CAA: Christian Anime Alliance. And what's the first word? Christian! And I know for me, as a Christian, issues like theology and politics are extremely important to my faith. Things such as presidents, economics, or whatever are very political. But they are also very spiritual topics too. And personally because of this, I feel like if I cannot talk about things which are important to my faith in Christ, then I am not allowed to fully represent myself as a Christian on a board where the very first WORD is "Christian". If you censor me from talking about these things, then you are censoring me from representing Christ in me. And that, I believe, is an extremely questionable thing for a forum such as CAA to do]
Are you suggesting that CAA from years ago was immature and couldn't handle discussions on theology and politics without disunity, but the current CAA is more mature overall / on average? I'm not saying that's right or wrong or anything, just that it's a fairly big call.

I would also appreciate being able to discuss theology and politics in a respectful manner. Whether the community is able to do this with respect - perhaps we can? I don't know.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Are you suggesting that CAA from years ago was immature and couldn't handle discussions on theology and politics without disunity, but the current CAA is more mature overall / on average? I'm not saying that's right or wrong or anything, just that it's a fairly big call.

No, that's actually a really good question that I don't really have an answer to. I guess all I can say is that I think we'd handle ourselves better than before? I think overall we've had a pretty good track record these past few months.

And while there is a sense of unity overall, I think we're too diverse to be unified on everything.

[ShiroiHikari]

tl;dr












Nah I'm kidding.

I'm going to be honest. Sometimes when I see a discussion going on that interests me, I get frustrated to see it locked. I also get frustrated when I hear the words "take it to PM." At this moment the point of any discussion is lost. The point of a forum is where anyone can give their opinion or viewpoint on whatever topic they choose. How can this be accomplished through private messaging? It can't. People cannot give their inputs to a wide audience and it is no longer an exchange of discussion which a forum promotes because it's narrowed to just two people. Even if a discussion is primarily between two people on a public thread, the point is that this allows other users to contribute their ideas. Many times I don't WANT to take it to PM because I don't want just one person's idea/opinion. I want EVERYONE'S thoughts. I know I'm not the only one here who thinks this too.

I have felt this way many, many times myself.

Also, having been here for a bazillion years, I think I would say that CAA is generally a more mature place than it used to be regarding discussion of srs bzns topics.

[Warrior4Christ]

And while there is a sense of unity overall, I think we're too diverse to be unified on everything.

Unity in the body of Christ? Surely?

EDIT: Oops, I thought that last word was "anything". Nevermind. And I don't think that's the point. Diversity within the body of Christ is a good thing to some degree (provided the core doctrine is common), otherwise we'd be uniform clones. But diversity doesn't have to create divisions or disunity.. you know, respectfully disagreeing and all that.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Right. Well I don't think we'd learn and grow if we were never around people different than us.

And Nette, I'm sure you're a better judge at that than I am. I was what? 14 when I joined?

[LadyRushia]

Believe me when I say that we're trying to figure this out on a moderator level.

Although I agree with everything you've said, the fact remains that while plenty of members would be able to handle such discussions without resorting to rudeness or singling others out, there are also many who can't. As mods, we need to figure out the best way to let CAA grow without making some members feel stupid for what they think.

[blkmage]

Let's be honest, when the mods say a thread has gone off topic, they mean a thread has gone off topic and has become incendiary.

There is a way to deal with that, which is to discipline members. I've noticed that there's a reluctance to do that here, but every major forum I've been to that has relatively productive discussions about controversial topics has effective ways of dealing with uncooperative members.

I'm going to say that we have had an opportunity to see if serious discussions would work and the takeaway for me has been that it still won't work. Yeah, we've gotten older and a segment of the community understands that things are complicated, but I don't think people have gotten any better at communicating that.

Let's take your first post, for example. I agree that my faith ties in pretty heavily to my politics (in ways which may surprise you!). But it's disingenuous to claim that because CAA is a Christian site, you have some sort of unconditional right to talk about those things or else you're being censored or this is somehow a police state. Besides the fact that you're wrong, the rhetoric you've used is already pretty heavy-handed.

That's the kind of thing that I'm talking about when I say that I don't think we're good at talking about this stuff. If that's the sort of imagery or illustration we start out with, we're going to be reaching Godwin's Law pretty quickly in a heated debate. And that's not to mention things like arguing about definitions or not giving people the benefit of the doubt and concentrating on edge cases or doing massive ADG-style quote deconstructions.

Also, I likely stand in opposition to a huge majority of people in that I don't think it is in the best interests of CAA to be a place to foster spiritual growth. I don't think forums are a very good venue for effective spiritual growth and I don't think they should be promoted as such.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Let's take your first post, for example. I agree that my faith ties in pretty heavily to my politics (in ways which may surprise you!). But it's disingenuous to claim that because CAA is a Christian site, you have some sort of unconditional right to talk about those things or else you're being censored or this is somehow a police state. Besides the fact that you're wrong, the rhetoric you've used is already pretty heavy-handed.

I'm going to have to strongly disagree here. While I don't believe that I have some sort of right, I do believe I ought to be allowed to truly reflect what is important to me in my faith, some which do also tread into controversial matters, but nonetheless hold a strong tie to theological ideas.

What I am saying is that because CAA is a Christian site, it has an obligation to foster growth which includes even the most controversial topics, as they hold a strong tie to faith. For example, I believe that as Christians we have a responsibility for the poor as well as a respect for all persons. This in turn boils down to not just what we do for people during homeless ministries, but our understanding and opinions of economics as well (i.e. capitalism, socialism, etc etc) which is no doubt a very political topic. Topics such as abortion fall under ethical discussions and debate as well. We as Christians cannot under any circumstance brush these under a rug due to how important they are. As Christians we must have a position on these issues. And if we have an idea which we truly believe is better representative of Christ, we no doubt ought to share this belief.

If to you this all constitutes as a right, than sure. We'll go with that.

That's the kind of thing that I'm talking about when I say that I don't think we're good at talking about this stuff. If that's the sort of imagery or illustration we start out with, we're going to be reaching Godwin's Law pretty quickly in a heated debate.

I think I'm understanding what you're saying, but not I'm not just there yet.

Often times, especially on forum posts, I'm not exactly the best communicator. Sometimes I end up being inaccessible and I jump the gun on some ideas. Nonetheless I don't think this ought to inhibit discussion. And while I am a part of this community, my postings alone shouldn't really be indicative of the whole.

Also, I likely stand in opposition to a huge majority of people in that I don't think it is in the best interests of CAA to be a place to foster spiritual growth. I don't think forums are a very good venue for effective spiritual growth and I don't think they should be promoted as such.

Yes I will definitely have to disagree with you on this. I believe that if we are to embody love, we are to do what we can for both friends and strangers to this community. Whether this be either praying for someone or really talking to someone about it over a PM. Whatever you can do. I don't think loving has to be limited by the constraints of the internet. While of course CAA isn't an outreach mission or anything, embodying love includes the willingness to foster spiritual growth in others (as little as it may be).

Believe me when I say that we're trying to figure this out on a moderator level.

Right. I'm pretty sure that it's being talked on the moderator level too, but I want to create a bridge of some sort between members and moderators and I hope that this can be accomplished by making a public thread.

As mods, we need to figure out the best way to let CAA grow without making some members feel stupid for what they think.

You bring up a very valid point that I can't ignore. This is very true both before and now, albeit it happens less. But it shouldn't ever really happen. There are still moments where there is disrespect or at the very least the perception of it (I also know some people who don't mean to sound disrespectful but end up coming off that way). I imagine this is something which needs to be taken care of first.

[Furen]

Also, I likely stand in opposition to a huge majority of people in that I don't think it is in the best interests of CAA to be a place to foster spiritual growth. I don't think forums are a very good venue for effective spiritual growth and I don't think they should be promoted as such.

A as well would pose a disagreement to this statement, though I can't talk for everyone as we all know many of us have very different opinions, being here has greatly strengthened my faith, much of it through fellowship, which is one thing a debate/discussion can effectively improve. Topics as well let me see how others around me feel/believe, letting me see how I've seen topics and open my eyes to things I would previously think of as straight forward to a more open faced topic.

The political section, I can't have a great opinion yet because I'm still trying to learn the basics, but I do see how greatly believes and faith can be a factor in such fields. I'm standing where Smarty is on this topic.

[blkmage]

Well, yeah, my highlighting of that example wasn't to say that your posts are an indicator of what it's like, but rather it's the kind of thing I've seen in those threads. Your post just happened to conveniently be the OP. The point is that these things show up in discussions and when they're compounded, they create a very hostile environment.

I don't disagree that politics and economics are important parts of our worldviews, but I guess I don't understand why those discussions need to take place here. It's not as though there's a lack of other venues to discuss these things. I don't think it's necessary that every Christian website become some sort of pseudo-church.

And because I don't think that, I think that diverting people to other resources and communities that are specifically focused on fostering spiritual growth is a much more effective way of encouraging that kind of growth.

It's about focus. CAA isn't good at those things and those things aren't necessary for what CAA is trying to do, which is to create a safe community for the discussion of Japanese visual culture and the examination of Christian perspectives into those works.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

blkmage, I suppose it's because of a sense of familiarity among the community. Plenty of people here I've gotten to know not only online, but in real life too. And while we may have vast disagreements (sometimes times to the verge of total frustration lolz), I still cherish these friendships I've made. And for that, I see CAA as a good venue to talk about broader topics. Because I am close with some people, there is more room for mutual exchange and growth.

And it's not to say that we ought to be purely a center of spiritual growth. I don't believe that is our primary objective. But it is an important part of Christianity. And as little as we may contribute, I think we should still do so. It's not that we become a pseudo-church, but rather we give room for more opportunities. I mean, we do have a prayer thread (which is greatly important, I'm don't want to sound like I'm downplaying its importance). But something as simple as spreading awareness on an issue is also spiritually engaging too. Yes this is CAA and yes there is definitely a focus on anime and other entertainment and stuff. But we are still people, yes? We all like to talk about non-anime things at times too. I mean that's why General and Goof-off exist and stuff.

[ich1990]

CAA is in a tough place. On one hand, few people talk about anime or manga anymore and General is the place with the greatest activity. On the other, I think it is pretty clear that we have a lot of people with alternative viewpoints on this site and most of them spend a great deal of time here pushing their agenda . Honestly, I am surprised that the theological topics have been so tame so far.

As for politics, well, I don't think that any form of reasonable discussion will be had. You mentioned PM's, and as it turns out I have exchanged dozens of PM's about politics with various members of this site. My conclusion? Some people might be willing to change their theological views given enough evidence and persuasion, but when it comes to politics everybody is convinced they are right and aren't interested in discussing the topic so much as making converts.

I think that the theology discussion should stay on probation and that political discussion is a very dumb idea. People don't discuss politics, they argue it. I don't want to see arguments exploding in every single thread and dividing the community even more than it already is. If you wan't to have your inconclusive and angry spat over the Just War Theory, do it in PM.

[bigsleepj]

I almost agree with you, but I don't want to see political discussions here. It wont work.

I've been on a forum once that used to be a very tight-knit group of people from around the world - the US, England, Europe, Asia, etc. It was one of my favourite places to visit on-line. I learned a lot there. But eventually there came a time when they began disagreeing with each other on US politics, and refused to agree to disagree. Eventually, the forum, despite being 15 years old, despite the fact these people visited each other, sent post-cards and even self-published a book they all wrote together, the political issues just broke everything down. Most of the truly horrific spats even took place in PMs, behind the backs of the moderators who hardly knew what was happening until it had been happening for years. Now the forum is not operating anymore because most of the good people left and many of the old time members harbour resentment towards other. The owner just packed things up and moved on.

These people were close, were adults, were some of the smartest people I met on-line, were well-read in theology and philosophy, but still it broke down because people refused to agree to disagree. Theological debates I'll welcome... but politics. That's just asking for trouble. Your argument that these things should be brought in the open is a valid one, but I feel that current politics in the world is too divisive for an open forum right now.

[Radical Dreamer]

On the PM issue: I agree. It's frustrating to have to cut a discussion down to two people where you want more than one person to give their input, and I'm not always sure that asking members to "take it to PM" like we've done for so many years is always the best way to handle something. It's not something I know how to fix right now either, but it is something that I understand, at the very least. XD

On lolitics, I don't really know. XD I understand what you mean when you say that some issues that happen to be political are very important to our faith. But I also don't see opening up to all corners of political discussion being very fruitful, either. I definitely see Bigsleep's point in that people are often the angriest and set in their ways when discussing politics. I know that not everyone is, and I'm sure that I would benefit and learn a lot from reading through some political discussions if we did have them here, but I don't think that completely opening up the forums to politics would really be the best idea. XD

[Fish and Chips]

The reason politics and religion are tricky subjects is because they're the sort of thing that goes deeper than simply opinions and ideas. It's part of how we identify ourselves. I can memetically hate on some Manga someone's reading that they love and they usually won't take it personally because it's just something they do, entertainment, a hobby - I'm not judging them as a person. It's superficial; surface tension.

But when I say "X is wrong," where X is a political ideal or a religious belief someone holds, I am directly challenging something crucial, something they likely consider one of the pillars of their life, around which they have actually built themselves. You cannot divorce personal feelings from a political or theological discussion.

The problem is that those feelings become the new issue, and it becomes less a war of ideas and more a war of personalities. There are people out there who flatly refuse to be wrong, and they tend to find each other very easily amidst these sort of discussions. I have disagreed completely with people I later convinced myself were right only after looking at it completely separated from my experiences with them.

I can name the number of people I know capable of handling a delicate political or theological issue with any extended measure of grace or composure on one hand. Only one of them posts on CAA. He isn't me.

He also isn't Mr. Smartypants.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

I'm not claiming that I'm better than anyone, but I know that I continually try to be respectful even to those I find myself frustrated with. I know I'm a messed up person just like everyone else and I make mistakes. And yes I am also opinionated. I admit all this. But Andrew, that's for me to bring to the table and not for you to call me out on like that. And I think comments like that are unnecessary and this is what I mean about us doing our best to be a more respectable community.

[goldenspines]

Well, yeah, my highlighting of that example wasn't to say that your posts are an indicator of what it's like, but rather it's the kind of thing I've seen in those threads. Your post just happened to conveniently be the OP. The point is that these things show up in discussions and when they're compounded, they create a very hostile environment.

I don't disagree that politics and economics are important parts of our worldviews, but I guess I don't understand why those discussions need to take place here. It's not as though there's a lack of other venues to discuss these things. I don't think it's necessary that every Christian website become some sort of pseudo-church.

And because I don't think that, I think that diverting people to other resources and communities that are specifically focused on fostering spiritual growth is a much more effective way of encouraging that kind of growth.

It's about focus. CAA isn't good at those things and those things aren't necessary for what CAA is trying to do, which is to create a safe community for the discussion of Japanese visual culture and the examination of Christian perspectives into those works.

I'm going to quote Blkmage because he brings up a point I've thought all along.
Now, I'm not sure if we can all agree, but I'm fairly certain that most of us hold our beliefs and even politics close to our hearts. When that belief is put in a position to be challenged, especially on an online forum (where we are nice for the most part, but it's quite impossible to fully understand or care about the other person's feelings because we don't know them well enough and we can't see the expressions or body language when we make a comment to them), the results can be devastating, depending on the person. And, because none of us can see much about the other person over the internet, we don't know if we hurt them unless they go off on us. But even then, we'll think they're over-reacting. But if they stay silent, they may be terribly hurt, but of course, we can't see it so we have no reason to care.
But, as I mentioned before, it depends on the person. Some are better at shielding their emotions than others in an argument. If every member on CAA and every person who it going to be a member in the furture can verify that they will never take posts personally in a discussion about theology or politics and never be hurt or scared off by someone else, then sure, I'd be okay with it.

Concerning my own view through being on CAA staff. All of us try to do what's best for the forum as a whole, not just for a few people. Are people not going to like some of the calls we make? Of course. That's life and that's how it's always been and probably always will be on CAA or any other forum.


Side note: This post is not meant for anyone in particular, just my general thoughts.

[Nate]

I remember after the 2008 election when Obama won and the Democrats took control of Congress, someone made a thread here saying "hate and lies won out in the recent election." We posted tons of funny pictures to kill the thread, but this is the kind of stuff that would happen if politics were allowed to be discussed.

You know me. You know I'm an exceptionally liberal Democrat. Most people on this site are not. I'm already accused of arguing just for the sake of arguing (which is of course untrue), how much worse do you think it would be if politics were allowed? My reputation of "Here comes Nate, now he's going to start an argument in this thread like he always does" would get even worse. Because the majority of people here are conservative and I'd be "that one guy" who always comes in and starts a fight.

And considering the "hate and lies" comment in that one thread, and the general feelings toward liberals and liberal politics by most people on this site, how do you think I would feel if discussion of this was openly allowed? I'd no longer feel welcome. I already feel alienated, like an outsider, like I don't belong here. Allowing political discussion would only exacerbate it. It'd pretty much be the thing that would seal my never setting foot on this board again.

And it's not just me. I think a lot of people here feel that if political discussion was ever allowed, this board would fall apart. Politics is such a divisive and frustrating issue that it doesn't foster growth, it doesn't foster unity, it doesn't promote togetherness. No one here is going to agree to disagree on politics like we sometimes do with theology. It's a different beast altogether.

I'm with blkmage. Politics is outside of the scope of this board's intentions. While the anime and manga forums might not be as popular as they once were, and the board may have grown a bit, there just are certain topics that should not be discussed here. Because sooner or later the whole thing that happened with "one person's" LiveJournal icon (I trust you remember what I'm talking about) would happen here. And I guarantee there would be someone on here who would make an icon like that their avatar or something. And then what happens? It turns into a flame war. With LiveJournal, we at least had the option to remove that person from our friends list and not deal with them. On CAA the only recourse would be to tell the user to remove the icon, in which case they'd say their viewpoint was being censored. It wouldn't make anyone happy. If anything, it would make things very unpleasant. There's already a lot of tension and ill will between some members here (and I'm not gonna lie, I'm part of a lot of it I'm sure) but allowing politics on here would make that tension snap, and there'd be mass bannings or leavings and well...the community would absolutely fall apart.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Politics is such a divisive and frustrating issue that it doesn't foster growth, it doesn't foster unity, it doesn't promote togetherness. No one here is going to agree to disagree on politics like we sometimes do with theology. It's a different beast altogether.

I'm an idealist, but I understand fully what you mean, Nate. I think it's unfortunate though. I hope we can change this.

[Nate]

I understand you're an idealist, but the problem is it would take only one person to ruin it. Even if 99% of us could discuss politics normally all you'd need is one person to start an "Obama is a secret Muslim socialist!" thread for it to all be torn down. And like I said, yeah, you could say "Oh well just delete the thread and give them a strike" but then guess what? They'd claim they were being censored. That their viewpoint wasn't being allowed. That someone else's politics were being favored over their own and that the mods were being unfair or had double standards.

In other words, they'd make this same thread you're making now. This is why politics should never be allowed on CAA.

[K. Ayato]

I have to agree. Allowing politics on CAA is one can of worms that is best left unopened.

[mechana2015]

I agree with bigsleep on this. Politics will, first of all, center on American politics almost exclusively, and unlike in theological debates the majority of the site does not hold to any sort of base reference point to fall back on. I think politics is outside the boards intentions and honestly outside the intentions of ANY board that doesn't like handing out 1 week bans when things get too heated. It will wreck the community to allow it, no matter how it's handled, especially with the current tempestuous political climate. If the whole genre of discussion were more civil across the spectrum I could consider this, but I think allowing it would allow the sorts of political comments that are fired out on youtube and all the news sites to come here. I don't think that it's really the SITE that's not ready, but the entirety of the internet community isn't ready to contain political discussions, for one reason or another.

[rocklobster]

well, there's that old saying. In polite discussion, three things are not allowed:
sports, politics, and religion. (oops. we allow the last one.)

[K. Ayato]

To (somewhat) quote Edward Bloom from Big Fish, "It's rude to talk about politics. You never know who you're gonna offend."

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Bigsleep, you make a very strong case. And it seems true. Theology would be far less heated than politics. Perhaps because politics is far less personal than religion is (as in it's global).

Nonetheless I do wish it's something that can be even somewhat more openly brought about. Nonetheless I'm still fully game for theology. That and more leniency towards thread-locks.

[FllMtl Novelist]

I also don't want to see political discussion on CAA. From what I've seen (which, granted, is hardly anything), unless the discussion is on a site where everyone's in agreement on most things, whatever "discussion" there was rapidly turns into little more than flaming. I doubt political threads would quite go there on this site, but there'd be a greater possibility of it.

Another thing that might be worth bringing up is that if politics are discussed, that's something parents would take into account then considering whether their kid should join the site. For instance, a Republican parent might not want their young child regularly going on a site with a lot of openly Democratic people on it. Even if it were kept to a sub-forum, a person's political leanings are likely to pop up in their signatures, avatars, etc., and therefore be seen throughout the site. Now I understand this site's purpose is not to be totally kid-friendly (and I think having the whole forum entirely rated G would be silly) but I think bringing politics on board could turn away a lot of potential young members. (Or rather, their parents.)

I also think that should political discussions be allowed, whichever side held the majority would drive the other side off the site, unintentionally or not. And that would make a whole slew of other potential new members feel they wouldn't belong, too.

So if this site is supposed to be welcoming, I think bringing politics in would kinda undermine that after a time.

I don't know, I guess I hate to see politics bleed over into places where it wasn't originally. And I'm a pretty recent member so I don't know all the regular debaters as well as they know each other. So maybe I'm just jabbering.

Also, I think Blkmage, FishandChips, Nate, and everyone else raised some good points.

[K. Ayato]

Ryan already touched on this, but I thought I'd mention it again. I feel a thread should continue to be unlocked even after a question posed by the OP has been answered. More often than not, other perspectives and related topics crop up during discussion in one thread. True, some topics may deserve their own separate thread (which decision should be considered as objectively as possible).

And of course, there is always the possibility of chasing down a topic that has little to no connection with what was originally posted. In either case, I feel it's important to view as objectively as possible and hold off on the lock button.

[Htom Sirveaux]

Gosh, I'm late for the party.


I rather like CAA being a relatively friendly place. We have occasional scraps, but every community does. Limitations are placed on discussion, and threads are locked when they start getting hairy, because we want to keep some order and prevent people being constantly at odds with one another.

What happens when sensible, well-founded rules are relaxed and people are given freedom to pretty much say whatever at any time? Same thing that happens in any human society. We abuse the heck out of our newfound freedom and end up tearing each other (and eventually our community) down.

More trouble than it's worth, is what I'm saying.