Another Forum Potentially Loses Its Credibility

[His clay]

I've spent a little time trying to interact in a forum I used to regularly post. A poster made an accusation against a certain theological position. I asked a question seeking to get the poster to offer more reasoning that would help connect the dots. In response, I've had my salvation attacked, and I've been the recipient of ad-hom attacks. I reported the first to a mod, and I received a rejection of my report stating that the poster was just expressing an opinion. The second infraction I reported today pointing to the reality that, if allowed to continue, ad-hominem attacks would destroy the forum's ability to foster conversations. Isn't that a main element of a forum? Fostering civil discussion

I just recently sent the report for the second, so I'm still unsure how the mod will respond. However, if the mod continues to gloss over flagrantly bad behavior, I will see the forum as a lost cause.

I guess that I'm just venting a little, but it does highlight the importance of good moderation and civil dialogue.

My interaction in that forum was simply questioning. I'm a little surprised that the forum has degenerated to such an extent, but we will see how the mod responds to the issue. The issue here isn't me being overly soft in a harsh internet environment. I can see some people giving the typical, "suck it up buttercup," response. I've been around the block; I used to debate in an atheist forum being called nearly every name in the book. Such a response fails to hit the issue that I'm trying to address, namely, a forum that used to be decent has possibly destroyed conversation by allowing obvious personal attacks to continue.

(This is about a different forum than this one.) I actually think very highly of this forum.

@Arial @Carbon I'm interested in other's thoughts.

 

[Arial]

I've spent a little time trying to interact in a forum I used to regularly post. A poster made an accusation against a certain theological position. I asked a question seeking to get the poster to offer more reasoning that would help connect the dots. In response, I've had my salvation attacked, and I've been the recipient of ad-hom attacks. I reported the first to a mod, and I received a rejection of my report stating that the poster was just expressing an opinion. The second infraction I reported today pointing to the reality that, if allowed to continue, ad-hominem attacks would destroy the forum's ability to foster conversations. Isn't that a main element of a forum? Fostering civil discussion

I just recently sent the report for the second, so I'm still unsure how the mod will respond. However, if the mod continues to gloss over flagrantly bad behavior, I will see the forum as a lost cause.

I guess that I'm just venting a little, but it does highlight the importance of good moderation and civil dialogue.

My interaction in that forum was simply questioning. I'm a little surprised that the forum has degenerated to such an extent, but we will see how the mod responds to the issue. The issue here isn't me being overly soft in a harsh internet environment. I can see some people giving the typical, "suck it up buttercup," response. I've been around the block; I used to debate in an atheist forum being called nearly every name in the book. Such a response fails to hit the issue that I'm trying to address, namely, a forum that used to be decent has possibly destroyed conversation by allowing obvious personal attacks to continue.

(This is about a different forum than this one.) I actually think very highly of this forum.

@Arial @Carbon I'm interested in other's thoughts.

We truly do try here to keep this forum different. I have found in all other forums I have been in that hate speech against Reformed is never disciplined, that the volume of theological ignorance is astounding and never corrected. It is just people fighting people. Staff takes a lot of heart from those who come here and try to behave the same way as they do in other places. And of course, their swan song is that it is the biased fault of staff that they are leaving. After having accused members and staff alike that we just get mad because they proved their position right, and we can't prove ours. Despite the fact that they never discussed anything that was given in opposition.