There are some off-topic discussions that are benign and others that lead to flamewars because they're polarizing and contentious. ***What we need for the internet is a heavily moderated TIP (Third Independent Party) website where the discussion can be transferred and disputes settled. I'm actually inclined to set it up. If Bill Beaty says he'd transfer the discussion, I'll set it up. There's probably already internet sites like this.
The topic of aliens is totally benign, ***I have not found that topic to be benign. Once you read the book "Intercept UFO" by Renato Vesco and engage others in discussion that UFOs are simply advanced boundary layer control secret aircraft, their hackles get raised. And when you point out that the typical result of the average Drake Equation output doesn't take into account things like Coppedge's finding of 10^-123 chances of a polypeptide forming into an amino acid (so there's no way that the chances of life forming on a typical planet and surviving the evolutionary process are 10^100), you get flames. Not science based discussion, simply flames. Most of that Ab/Jojo flame war was properly labelled OT posts and easily avoided. I remember finding out from that flamewar that it is historically acknowledged that Mohammed married a 9 year old girl. So we learn some things from such threads. On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Eric Walker <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> > wrote: > > ***Then why do some Vorts say that the discussion is not for Vortex, even >> when the thread title is obviously [OT Off Topic]? >> > > Just my personal view on this one. There are some off-topic discussions > that are benign and others that lead to flamewars because they're > polarizing and contentious. The topic of aliens is totally benign, and > global warming mostly benign (if a little polarizing). Biblical exegesis, > the truth or falsehood of Islam, etc., are polarizing and contentious and > lead to flamewars. There's nothing in the fabric of the universe that > calls these topics out as being wrong topics for discussion. It's seeing > what has happened to Vortex in the past when people (doggedly) insist on > pursuing them. Vortex turns into American Gladiators. If someone not only > doesn't care whether their participation turns Vortex into American > Gladiators, but they actually seek it out, they should look for another > forum that is more amenable to their purposes. I would feel this way even > if they espoused views very similar to my own. > > This is what I'm personally hoping we can avoid: > > > https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=site%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.mail-archive.com%2Fvortex-l%40eskimo.com%20Jojo%20Abd%20Islam > > Endless flamewar. Weeks of it. No end in sight. Signal to noise ratio > exactly 0. No apologies afterwards. No regrets for having turned Vortex > into a platform for pursuing one's evangelical agenda. Every indication of > doing it again if given the opportunity. > > I can understand the sentiment when someone wants to talk about evolution >> theory on a thread that's titled "SunCell Replication" but not when the >> thread title is "evolutionists are idiots", or somesuch thing. >> > > This is a question for James. I note that James did not provoke a > flamewar nor, I would assume, did he intend to provoke one. He was just > expressing frustration. > > Eric > >
