Hi Mods,

I'm writing this because I was hoping there could be some clarity given regarding the rules for posting about religion in the Stand the Test section.

As I understand it, that board exists specifically for topics relating to debunking and skepticism, and the sticky at the top of the forum specifically mentions religious skepticism. More to the point, I suppose, the ideas that debunkers and skeptics go after are often quite sacred to the folks who believe in them, and often the emotions involved run just as high as they do in discussions on the topic of religion.

My interepretation of that had been that in that forum there is a more "open" policy on that topic then is generally the case elsewhere in the Magic Café. If that's not the case, and it apparently is not, could you please clarify what is and is not kosher in that area?

Thanks,
Jason

To go a bit further and let you know what I'd like to see is something like this:



from the Gospel Magic section laid out for Stand the Test. that is to say, the real problem on that forum, it seems to me, is not that people disagree. disagreement is healthy and normal. the problem is that people in Stand the Test are often disrespectful of eachother. Something like the following on the model of the Gospel Magic display I think would be very reasonable and would let all participants know where they stand:

This forum is provided as an area for skeptics and believers in the paranormal to discuss topics pertaining to belief and how those topics relate to magic - - Not for skeptics to bash believers, believers to bash skeptics, or for flame wars between the factions. If skepticism and debunking is not your thing, the Café provides plenty of other categories to choose from, thank you.

I'd also suggest that something along these lines be added:

"In this forum and this forum only, comparative religion may be discussed as it relates to belief, but posters on this topic MUST be respectful of persons holding different beliefs from their own. This is not an appropriate forum for proselytization, but respectful discussions about the reasons for belief and what people believe makes for good or bad reasons is within the realms of what can be discussed on THIS forum."

or

"As in all sections of the forum, discussions of religion are not acceptable. Please confine discussion about reasons for belief and what people believe makes for good or bad reasons to the abstract notions of justification without bringing specific religious beliefs such as the existence of God into the discussion. Posts that fail to remain within these guidelines will be deleted without notice or explanation."

I guess what I'm asking for is just some boundaries to be drawn so we can be more sure of our footing.

I wish to second the request made by jfquackenbush. Thanks.

I agree that some clarification from the management would be helpful. The "Can anyone believe in God?" thread in the "Stand the Test" section seemed to fall within the guidelines as currently written. The entire thread was deleted rather than the deletion of a post(s) that was in direct violation of a rule. This seems particularly heavy-handed in light of the rude and insulting posts that are allowed to remain in other topics in this section.

Randwill

Might I say publicly that I gave up posting in Stand the Test because I found he nature of the discussion disrespectful, disagreeable, and ungentlemanly. Perhaps such clarification would tempt me to participate in the discussion once again.

It seems to me, having read not only the rules but Steve's explanation of why he started the Café, that nothing violates the spirit of the Café more than personal, rude and insulting attacks on fellow members.

Jeff

I too would like to express my support for all four of the gentlemen above, and in addition, pose the following.

If I remember correctly, the 'Stand The Test' forum was launched (in part) in an effort to separate the paranormal vs science discussions (arguments) that used to occur fairly regularly in the 'Penny For Your Thoughts' section. Most of us were grateful for the new forum, and began spending significant time there. However many of the original posters are now nowhere to be seen, as the forum is flooded on a daily basis with unsubstantiated stories about the "paranormal", unnecessary smear campaigns, "challenges" that ask us to leave the forum and insults.

I have posted elsewhere my theory that were any of us to visit the gospel magic section and begin posting about the overwhelming evidence for evolution, or the damage that religion causes to society, we would likely have our accounts here suspended, if not terminated completely. Why is it then, that "believers" (for want of a better word) are allowed to wander in to the 'Stand The Test' forum and continuously post their opinions unchallenged and without retribution? The members in question have openly admitted that their actions are merely an attempt to "wind up" or "bait" the skeptics, yet their posts are permitted to continue.

I understand (but don't necessarily agree with) the need for a certain level of restraint regarding these topics. But I don't see why the discussions can't continue if it is understood by others that they may not like what they read inside a specific forum. In addition, if they don't like it, they can choose not to view it. The courtesy should be extended to both sides of the argument. In the same way that we politely stay away from the religious magic sections, we too should be permitted to have our own opinions without having to defend them from attacks by individuals who are posting merely to get a reaction.

I'm certainly not opposed to any kind of rational discussion, and like most others I encourage it. But the 'Stand The Test' forum is not even remotely enjoyable when we have to spend the majority of our time defending our claims and ideas against persistent nonsense, or having the genuine threads hijacked by those members with an ulterior motive.

Cheers,

Chris

Indeed.

I originally created the forum to relieve the mantalists from the constsnt bickering going on with the skeptics. Afterall, I could not see how mentalism and being skeptical had anything to do with each other.

Since that time I see that having a seperate forum has only moved the hornets nest from the tree in the backyard to the awning on the front porch - not too much of an improvement. From what I am seeing these so-called skeptics are worse than the very people they are going after, a real shame me thinks.

So what can be done? I'm not sure.

I do agree that believers have no more business going there and starting trouble anymore than non-believrs do in the gospel area. However, I am not totally convinced that these people are the only problem. Again, the skeptics seem to be able to argue amongst themselves with little effort.

Since many of the posters fighting daily cannot act like adults then perhaps the entire forum should be removed?

I welcome any suggestions while I think this situation over.

I haven't visited that section until I heard of the complaints here. I don't think being sceptical about religion is the same as "Can anyone believe in God?" which is obviously flame bait for a religious argument cloaked in the name of "scepticism" to try and circumvent the "no religious discussion" rules enforced elsewhere in the Café.

I like jfquackenbush's suggestion of an amendment to the rules such as "As in all sections of the forum, discussions of religion are not acceptable..."

It won't silence all the trouble makers, but it's one less thing they'll be allowed to argue about here.

Steve, with all due respect, your comment reveals a great deal of bias in this matter.

To expand, because I somehow managed to hit post too fast...

as I see it as a reader of the forum I see three problems:

1.) There are certain folks who are not interested in having the conversation about debunking, skepticism etc and instead spend their time in the forum slandering people critical of the proposition that psychic phenomena etc are "real" with epithets like the one you yourself used "so called skeptics"

2.) enforcement of rules against personal attacks are not evenly enforced. I myself am neither a "true believer" nor a "skeptic" as my views on the matter don't fit easily into either camp. This gives me, I think, a different view of the situation than partisans. I see a number of folks who are able to be insulting and "bait" others with relative impunity when there are clear rules against this. At the same time, I know that there are several members of the forum who feel that they have been stifled or silenced simply because they hold a different viewpoint. I have to say as a somewhat neutral observer, I have to agree that that appears to be the case.

3.) There is a lack of clarity about what exactly is and is not acceptable discussion. You said that you created the forum to move such discussions about the reality of psychic phenomena out of the mentalism forum, and that's a legitimate reason to do so. But I think that you also have to recognize that there are members of the forum like myself and I think a number of other people whose interest in the topic goes beyond the "are psychics real" conversation. Both Bill Ligon and myself have posted topics in the last couple of days relating to magic and belief in a way that I think fits into the general theme of the forum and that I think show the value of the forum as something beyond just a dumping ground for fights between skeptics.

My solutions to these problems, if I ran the Café, would be as follows:

1.) zero tolerance from the moderators for personal attacks and baiting of others along the lines of the model I posted in the thread "My MDC Entry; or what Psychic Samurai is up to for those who haven't figured it out"

2.) a clear explanation of what is and is not kosher as far as discussion of sensitive topics goes, including religion and belief

3.) a statement about the nature of the forum and what can fly there along the lines of the suggestion that I made in my previous comment.

I think, given that, those of us who want to have a seriosu conversation about the matters at hand around issues of skepticism and debunking will be able to enjoy the forum and there will be more clarity around what does and does not fly. For my own part, I'd just rather not see interesting conversations disappear along with all the thought and energy put into longish posts. I'd also prefer it if people could go about having disagreements without trading insults or purposely trying to be frustrating to others. I think there is clearly a contingent of users of that forum who are capable of acting like grownups, and it woudl be nice if that could be seen as something separate from the childish nonsense that you're referring to. At this point I don't think that the management is really making that distinction.

Some are just skeptical of mentalists who maintain they aren't doing magic.

A careful reading of the most active threads will reveal that some particular so-called believers use slander and innuendo to bait other members (who admittedly should know better) and then insult them when they dare to disagree with them.

Your posting guidelines suggest members stick to attacking the argument and not each other. Enforcing this on members on BOTH sides of the believer/skeptic coin (despite the biases of those doing the moderating) would show ALL Magic Café members that an effort was being made to provide a place where people of differing viewpoints can share their opinions without being ridiculed by another member. Currently, reasoned arguments are frequently met with childish taunts and insults. I've seen reasoned arguments that directly responded to childishness (as much as this is possible) deleted, while the immature rants were allowed to remain.

Since you say above that the "so-called skeptics are worse than the very people they are going after", I suspect that you've not seen the slander and personally insulting posts made daily by some on the believer side. Or your own bias is preventing you from viewing the situation objectively. Or mine is.

Suggestions? I suggest that moderators who are sympathetic to one side of the argument use more discretion in deciding what remains and what stays in all forums. Perhaps censorship decisions should be reviewed before implementation. I suggest that threads that are spinning out of control not be deleted in the Orwellian fashion they now are, but that moderators interject into the thread, stating what rules have been violated and help guide the discussion on the topic. I suggest that members who continually bait other members and personally insult each other have these posts edited and a notation included as to what and why objectionable material was removed.

In short, I'm suggesting a more open relationship between management and customer. Saying that posts and topics will be deleted at management's whim with no explanation given is not very helpful to members and opens the door to biased and abusive censorship by disparate moderators with their own agendas. All of this assumes there is a desire by management for the Magic Café to be a place where people who hold a variety of opinions can express themselves and be treated with respect even by those who don't agree with them.

Randwill

I don't think that removing the section is any benefit to anyone.
A select group of people argue and act like children on all sections of the Café.
Many people have engaged in serious and thoughtfull discussion on the stand the test section.
I always felt that the very title "stand the test" was meant to encourage that sort of debate.
Sure some people lose their tempers, but people lose their tempers even in the "Period Magic" section about semi-pointless little details.
Removing the "Stand the Test" section would not solve anything.
Sort of amounts to "going to bed angry" if you ask me.
Especially because it is the same half a dozen people who lose their cool every time. Not a particularly difficult situation to address.
These few name callers and bigots should be dealt with on a case by case basis.

Quite honestly, I am exceedingly disgusted with the following fact:

When I get up in the morning, fresh and clear headed and with coffee in hand, this thread is locked.

When I look at it late at night, when I've had one beer too many and would rather not post something requiring my complete focus and attention, it is again open.

Why should anyone decide that no one should post to this thread during the "night". And why should the same person decide that "night" is by definition what is night in North America?