Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: Why are political discussions not allowed?
  • Subject: Why are political discussions not allowed?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3
Subject: Why are political discussions not allowed?

It's been said they simply do not want political threads discussed publicly on the site. They really don't need a reason.

  • 08.27.2011 5:52 PM PDT

01000001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100010 01100001 01110011 01100101 00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100010 01100101 01101100 01101111 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01110101 01110011

Sorry, I don't mean to sound rude or offensive, but OP, did you have any real world experience talking to people or just taking in the world out there? Or at least watch the news and other news media or read the paper?

If you had, you would quickly realize that you made an incredibly silly statement.

Now I realize that we all have our own perspective on the world, but people getting upset over politics? Really? How the hell did you miss that detail? This is the kinda situation where people allude to living under a rock.

  • 08.27.2011 5:54 PM PDT

Posted by: xLAS3RP01NT3Rx
Relevancy is irrelevant.

No, it's absolutely relevant. He can't say 'this should be banned too' when the topic is relevant to the website. The Flood isn't a 'post anything you want' forum. It's an Off-Topic discussion forum. That means off topic discussion that Achronos doesn't mind having on the website. Threads like ones about Consoles are relevant to this website and banning them is silly. But nothing good comes from Political discussion and since it isn't relevant to the website at all, he doesn't want it here.

Perfect relevant.

  • 08.27.2011 6:05 PM PDT

Hello, I'm Mr AwesomePizza. I like pizza and I'm a man. Reasoning for the name. I like to listen to the classics of music, write poetry, play video games, and much much more. I'm always down for a nice chat, so please hit me up for some conversation.

People get really defensive of their political views.
Everyone thinks their opinion is better than the next guys so they'll try to prove it. This ends in flamming and bicker. I made a topic about one of Obama's ideas once and the whole thread was turned into a "Who's party is Better" thread. Political discussion is a no no.

  • 08.27.2011 6:12 PM PDT

"I don't care if it's God's own anti-Son of a -blam!- Machine or a giant hula-hoop!"

Posted by: burritosenior
Posted by: xLAS3RP01NT3Rx
Relevancy is irrelevant.

No, it's absolutely relevant.
To put it in other words, if it is on-topic in another forum, it is off-topic in the flood.

The Bungie Community Forum is for all topics directly related to the Bungie community itself, the Bungie.net community, and the Bungie.net website.

  • 08.27.2011 6:13 PM PDT

Political discussions can become heated, and offensive fairly quickly. I wouldn't even engage in speaking on a political subject if it were on any forum.

  • 08.27.2011 6:25 PM PDT

',:|

-Large post warning-


Posted by: JobeTheConqueror
Sorry, I don't mean to sound rude or offensive, but OP, did you have any real world experience talking to people or just taking in the world out there? Or at least watch the news and other news media or read the paper?
I don't know about the OP, but I do, every day. I also listen to political talk radio both ways in my daily commute.

If you had, you would quickly realize that you made an incredibly silly statement.

Now I realize that we all have our own perspective on the world, but people getting upset over politics? Really? How the hell did you miss that detail? This is the kinda situation where people allude to living under a rock.
As far as I can tell, you mean to say that it's obvious that political discussions are somehow more prone to upset and mindless argument than other aspects of life.

I assure you this is not the case.

Posted by: burritosenior
Posted by: xLAS3RP01NT3Rx
Relevancy is irrelevant.

No, it's absolutely relevant. He can't say 'this should be banned too' when the topic is relevant to the website. The Flood isn't a 'post anything you want' forum. It's an Off-Topic discussion forum. That means off topic discussion that Achronos doesn't mind having on the website. Threads like ones about Consoles are relevant to this website and banning them is silly. But nothing good comes from Political discussion and since it isn't relevant to the website at all, he doesn't want it here.

Perfect relevant.
I understand the Achronos bit, but answer me this:

How is MLP or abortion or evolution any more relevant to the website than politics?
I can assure you nothing good comes from any of those threads either.
Politics is simply against the rules because Achronos wants it to be, but it isn't special.
Posted by: squeak52
Posted by: burritosenior
Posted by: xLAS3RP01NT3Rx
Relevancy is irrelevant.

No, it's absolutely relevant.
To put it in other words, if it is on-topic in another forum, it is off-topic in the flood.

The Bungie Community Forum is for all topics directly related to the Bungie community itself, the Bungie.net community, and the Bungie.net website.
I'm not quite getting your point...

Posted by: Mr AwesomePizza
People get really defensive of their political views.
Everyone thinks their opinion is better than the next guys so they'll try to prove it. This ends in flamming and bicker. I made a topic about one of Obama's ideas once and the whole thread was turned into a "Who's party is Better" thread. Political discussion is a no no.

Posted by: LordMonkey
Political discussions can become heated, and offensive fairly quickly. I wouldn't even engage in speaking on a political subject if it were on any forum.
To both of these:
So do the topics of abortion and evolution.
Why is politics special?

[Edited on 08.27.2011 6:27 PM PDT]

  • 08.27.2011 6:25 PM PDT

~ Life is Killing Me. ~

~ I hate, therefore I am. ~


Posted by: sircaleb11
(This might only be for the Flood forum, as I understand it.)

I can't see people being offended in the way religious discussions can get, so why aren't politics allowed?

This isn't a petition.


In the words of the famous Mark Twain:

"When in a discussion, there are no better ways to raise the ire of a man than to turn the discussion to either Politics or Religion."

[Edited on 08.27.2011 6:31 PM PDT]

  • 08.27.2011 6:27 PM PDT

XBL: l Sonic l
PSN: Sonic_343

Because members of this site can't even keep a discussion about video games civil?

  • 08.27.2011 6:28 PM PDT

Posted by: Dropship dude
No, acnboy. Spartain Ken 15 is a lesser being. Much like the bacteria that lives in your shi­t.
Posted by: mike120593
My shi­t bacteria takes offense to that comparison.

Don't make me lel. You won't like me when I lel.

I've seen ONE religious thread get to 5 pages without being a total flamewar. Politics (with the exception of the Arab Springs uberthread), not a chance.

  • 08.27.2011 6:48 PM PDT

Take a step back with me and enjoy a taste of the bittersweet that is our current generation.

I enjoy Battlefield and Call of Duty, and Gears of War.

20 years old, manager of my family's business, aspiring officer of the law.

I love anything political.

Political discussion involves multiple parties taking a stance in which they believe to be the correct choice, regardless of how misguided it may seem to another viewer. They inevitably lead to misinformation, flaming, and lose all discussion value at one point or another as nothing ever gets done due to the position each side takes.

Conclusion: Spam and flaming are the end result.

  • 08.27.2011 7:11 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

And the Shadow fell upon the Land, and the World was riven stone from stone. The oceans fled, and the mountains were swallowed up, and the nations were scattered to the eight corners of the World. The moon was blood, and the sun was as ashes. The seas boiled, and the living envied the dead. All was shattered, and all but memory lost, and one memory above all others, of him who brought the Shadow and the Breaking of the World. And him they named Dragon.

Because Bungie don't want them here.

And they usually don't end well.

  • 08.27.2011 7:40 PM PDT

Posted by: Skibur
inb4 everyone.

Posted by: Qbix89
Because Bungie don't want them here.

And they usually don't end well.
Usually?

  • 08.27.2011 7:47 PM PDT

Artes, Scientia, Veritas

Sapere Aude

"But I do not think we're invincible"


Posted by: Kickimanjaro
I would argue that it's because people would take it too seriously and it would become a flame war.
I would argue that not taking it seriously is more likely to cause flame wars than seriousness. Those who are serious want to avoid argumenta ad hominem and such...

  • 08.27.2011 8:18 PM PDT

Thank you Bungie,

See you starside.

Posted by: NewRadical12

Posted by: Kickimanjaro
I would argue that it's because people would take it too seriously and it would become a flame war.
I would argue that not taking it seriously is more likely to cause flame wars than seriousness. Those who are serious want to avoid argumenta ad hominem and such...


People take it seriously because political discussion is a field which important to people and is extremely opinionated. It is not easy to move someone across the political spectrum, and those who are the firmer rooted are often those who become the more defensive.

Fire breeds fire, and you get your flame war in the end.

  • 08.27.2011 8:31 PM PDT

Posted by: xLAS3RP01NT3Rx
I understand the Achronos bit, but answer me this:

How is MLP or abortion or evolution any more relevant to the website than politics?
I can assure you nothing good comes from any of those threads either.
Politics is simply against the rules because Achronos wants it to be, but it isn't special.
Is MLP the My Little Pony thing? It's an off-topic forum, mate. You can discuss that. That isn't a bad topic. It isn't a taboo topic. You might as well ask what more do eagles have to do with the website. Nothing. But they're off topic and not 'bad.'

The others? Because when the staff tried listing everything against the rules, people would just find loopholes. So now they have rules and leave things up to the moderator's judgment. Recon 54 participates in those other threads sometimes in the hope of having actual discussion. The threads aren't in themselves bad.

Political discussion, however, is not relevant to this website nor wanted in the public forums. Xbox discussion is completely relevant to this website and welcome in the public forums.

[Edited on 08.27.2011 8:48 PM PDT]

  • 08.27.2011 8:47 PM PDT

Vengeance only leads to an ongoing cycle of hatred.

They only lead to bad things.

  • 08.27.2011 8:49 PM PDT

Thank you Bungie,

See you starside.

I thought it would be interesting to note that as we speak, a religion flame war is going on in the flood...

Can't we just nuke that damned forum and get it over with?

  • 08.27.2011 8:52 PM PDT

Key


Posted by: Commando3200
I thought it would be interesting to note that as we speak, a religion flame war is going on in the flood...

Can't we just nuke that damned forum and get it over with?


We should just make 10 topics in the flood and make making new topics impossible.

1. What is your favorite color?

2. What is your favorite pokemon?

3. Say a random fact.

4. What is your favorite character from MLP?

5. What is your favorite cartoon show?

6. The Pirates V.S. Ninjas Debate.

7. Who is your favorite BNet Member? (The Popularity Thread)

8. The Sports Thread

9. Favorite Video Game Thread

10. What is your favorite food?

That would solve most of the problems.

  • 08.27.2011 9:01 PM PDT

When I grow up I want to be bitter and spiteful.

"i liked the reality where everything was on fire better"
-legato on remedial chaos theory

Politics settle nothing.

  • 08.27.2011 9:02 PM PDT

I remember when I used this space to put cool looking links to my chapters back in the day. I don't even know why I'm using it now. Why are you even reading this? You must be interested in me. Still reading?

Politics can be a sensitive topic to some. It simply leads to unnecessary arguments which leads to name-calling, extreme usage of the -blam!- filter, and ultimately, the derailment of a thread. Some members just can't handle it.

  • 08.27.2011 9:17 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: chotato
smart, interesting, seems out of place.


Official fan of Assassin's Creed, Call of Duty, (Problem with that?) Halo, and Bungie, also a total gaming junkie.

Same reason religious discussion isn't allowed:

Idiots.

  • 08.27.2011 9:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Talk to the Soul | ~B.B. | Know Your Duardo |  | Hero | ISFJ | 77135 | 94371

"It's not who I am underneath, but what I do that defines me."

Posted by: Achronos
Well, this thread is likely getting locked, before I have to ban people. But let's be clear here - Obi's pretty much right here.

Religion/faith/etc. is a conversation about "why" and "who".
Scientific theory is a conversation about "what" and "how".

The first is highly personal, and also isn't able to be proven wrong (see: definition of "faith"). The second has a process (called the scientific method) by which a hypothesis is made and observation and experimentation are used to confirm or deny that hypothesis. After many repetitions, a theory about how something works or what it is is developed, and observation/experimentation continues. It is called a theory because while it is very easy to prove something wrong, it is very hard to prove something as always right (see: Newtonian physics failing to account for relativistic effects, etc.)

The reason politics and religion aren't allowed as discussion topics on here is because of two factors: it is highly personal and emotional, and there are no "right" answers. Whereas a conversation about a scientific theory doesn't usually have these problems. The topic commonly referred to as "evolution" gets in trouble because most people don't understand how the scientific method works and incorrectly attach agendas, politics, etc (both sides do this). Discussions about climate change often get in trouble here too.

It comes down to the simple fact that all of science can be describe with math and/or observable phenomena. Matters of faith can't, and it is inappropriate to have discussions about them here.

Posted by: Obi Wan Stevobi
Um...the definition of a scientific theory is that it can be proven wrong. The theory of common descent can absolutely be proven wrong by observation and experimentation, it just hasn't happened. Maybe it will maybe it won't. But there is a very big distinction in that one can possibly be proven false, and the other, by definition, is a leap of faith.

  • 08.27.2011 9:20 PM PDT

',:|


Posted by: burritosenior
Posted by: xLAS3RP01NT3Rx
I understand the Achronos bit, but answer me this:

How is MLP or abortion or evolution any more relevant to the website than politics?
I can assure you nothing good comes from any of those threads either.
Politics is simply against the rules because Achronos wants it to be, but it isn't special.
Is MLP the My Little Pony thing? It's an off-topic forum, mate. You can discuss that. That isn't a bad topic. It isn't a taboo topic. You might as well ask what more do eagles have to do with the website. Nothing. But they're off topic and not 'bad.'
What does "bad topic" mean?
Look, if politics is a "bad topic," so is abortion, and so is evolution. They're all the same in terms of response, which is the only possible reason to disallow political discussion in the first place.

If you're saying it's "bad" because it's against the rules, that would be circular logic.
You can't say politics is bad and against the rules because it's against the rules.
Similarly, you can't say political discussion is bad because Achronos says it is.The others? Because when the staff tried listing everything against the rules, people would just find loopholes. So now they have rules and leave things up to the moderator's judgment. Recon 54 participates in those other threads sometimes in the hope of having actual discussion.Why doesn't that include politics? Because Achronos says so? The threads aren't in themselves bad.Again, what does "bad" mean, and why is "bad" against the rules?

Political discussion, however, is not relevant to this website nor wanted in the public forums. Xbox discussion is completely relevant to this website and welcome in the public forums.All of this is subjective, and I never mentioned Xbox discussion.


This is my argument: there is absolutely no reason to ban political discussion other than "it usually turns into a flame war," which is hardly relevant when certain topics present every day, such as abortion, evolution, the troops, and MLP, do the same and are NOT banned.

I don't have anything against, "Achronos just doesn't like it," but there's really nothing particularly special about politics (such as being highly opinionated or provocative) that isn't present in other topics to a greater degree.

Posted by: American Recoil
Politics can be a sensitive topic to some. It simply leads to unnecessary arguments which leads to name-calling, extreme usage of the -blam!- filter, and ultimately, the derailment of a thread. Some members just can't handle it.
The same can be said of topics involving disrespect to the troops, religion, or evolution.


Posted by: Ktan Dantaktee
Same reason religious discussion isn't allowed:

Idiots.
Idiots are not exclusive to religion and politics.

@Duardo: That's nice, but it doesn't have to do with politics, unless you mean to say that political discussion is comparable to that of religion because they both deal with faith and in-disprovable beliefs- opinions, essentially.
If an opinion is, "a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty," I would say political and religious discussions do revolve solely around opinions. This alone cannot be the reason the subjects are banned, but the general lack of tolerance for opinions usually found in the threads cannot be the reason either, as this is not exclusive to political and religious discussion.



TL;DR: Politics and religion, as far as I can work out, are banned because they usually follow a certain pattern. Because other subjects follow the same pattern but are often allowed to carry on unhindered, I feel like I'm missing something.

[Edited on 08.27.2011 9:37 PM PDT]

  • 08.27.2011 9:22 PM PDT

Posted by: xLAS3RP01NT3Rx
What does "bad topic" mean?
A topic that would most likely offend someone and that Achronos doesn't want talked about.

Look, if politics is a "bad topic," so is abortion, and so is evolution. They're all the same in terms of response, which is the only possible reason to disallow political discussion in the first place.
They aren't the same in terms of responses. I said this using Recon 54's trend as an example. But the responses aren't the issue, regardless. It's a matter of 'political discussion' covering what the moderators want it to cover, then using their own judgment to whether something is allowed. Based on the thread. Why? Because Achronos doesn't want some things discussed because they are 'bad' topics. What you seem to be arguing is that they should put those in the rules too. But that's silly. When the rules were detailed, people would just find loopholes. Now it is up to each moderator to decide what is allowed and what isn't.

If they judge something bad, then they'll lock it. Nothing lost. And if the thread is really bad (i.e. evolution is right, God isn't real and whomever disagrees with me is stupid' crap) then the user will get banned. But you're asking them to go back to the super detailed things. If a topic isn't allowed the user isn't going to be banned unless it is actually offensive most likely. But it is up to the moderators to decide what they can and cannot risk continuing in a forum.

Similarly, you can't say political discussion is bad because Achronos says it is.Sure I could. If the big man doesn't want it then it's a bad topic. If he were to say 'discussing the website is against the rules from now on' then website discussion would be bad.

Why doesn't that include politics? Because Achronos says so?See my second paragraph.

what does "bad" mean, and why is "bad" against the rules? See my first paragraph.

All of this is subjective, and I never mentioned Xbox discussion.My first post was in response to somebody saying Xbox Vs. Playstation threads should be banned because people sometimes flame in them. Then you replied saying I was wrong.

[Edited on 08.27.2011 9:37 PM PDT]

  • 08.27.2011 9:37 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3