Let God decide. If a poster is struck down by lightening for saying
something, then we know its against the laws of nature. We then make
it an informal rule not to do that -- to protect innocent posters from
being struck down by the wrath of the Lord. Or, for obnoxious posters,
we lure him/her into doing that act -- so God will off them.

I do however support, in the guidelines, a ban on profanities hurled
against someone. But not used for emphasis -- ocassionally. Thus "You
F*ckhead!" would be against the guidelines. "Thats f*cking awsome" --
used occasionally, would be OK. 

However, the guidelines already cover this in a general way -- and
they are almost universally ignored and not enforced. So what good are
rules -- we have some good ones on the books, if they are not enforced?





--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Duveyoung
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 11:16 PM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Civil Speech and Behavior
> 
>  
> 
> I'm all for rules!!!!
> 
> Put yourself in my shoes. How would you enforce civility without
becoming a
> dictator and without even having the time to read all the posts here?
> Everyone feels that their perspective is more or less right, and I�m no
> exception. And maybe it is, but it�s only a slice of the pie of all
> possibilities. Would you feel objective and righteous enough to pass
> judgment on all the posters here? Could you be sure your own biases and
> moods weren�t coloring your judgment? Simple rules are easy to
enforce, such
> as �here�s a list of insulting words you can�t use in addressing one
> another,� but when we get into having to judge whether people are
coarsening
> the atmosphere by being insufficiently polite and respectful, it becomes
> impossible to manage.
> 
> 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.8/993 - Release Date: 9/6/2007
> 3:18 PM
>


Reply via email to