Rule #6 addresses political posts. Wouldn't it be a lot more straightforward (and easier on the mods) if the rule simply stated "No political posts allowed"? The "...(unless they have to do with tobacco policies and legislation)." part should probably just be removed, because we all know what directions those posts are going to go in anyway, and it never seems to be good. Just a thought.
RE: Rule # 6
- Thread starter aldecaker
- Start date
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
- Status
Unfortunately, political posts here have had a very destructive effect in the past, causing the loss of members and a lot of bad feeling that can take weeks to heal. It's disruptive and it eventually leads to banning of the participants, so why do this? That's why the rule was enacted.
But there's a way to discuss tobacco legislation that keeps to the topic and doesn't stray off into personal political manifestos and generalizing. Stick to the substance of the legislation and to an objective reporting of it rather than one's personal opinions and wider bias. Being kept informed on legislation can be useful. Political posturing isn't. Keep your ego out of it.
But there's a way to discuss tobacco legislation that keeps to the topic and doesn't stray off into personal political manifestos and generalizing. Stick to the substance of the legislation and to an objective reporting of it rather than one's personal opinions and wider bias. Being kept informed on legislation can be useful. Political posturing isn't. Keep your ego out of it.
Political posts are hard because you have two basic groups, one that wants equality/freedom and the other that wants social order. They want different societies and will clash and alienate each other.
I suggest an informal forum somewhere where people can bash out "pipes and politics" because a lot of people enjoy fighting it out.
I suggest an informal forum somewhere where people can bash out "pipes and politics" because a lot of people enjoy fighting it out.
Only MY opinions, life experiences, concerns and perspectives are valid.
The rest of you can go suck eggs! :nana:
Now we can lock this thread and get back to PAD, TAD, tongue bite and the battle of the cleaning techniques.
You're welcome, forum. Enjoy your day!
The rest of you can go suck eggs! :nana:
Now we can lock this thread and get back to PAD, TAD, tongue bite and the battle of the cleaning techniques.
You're welcome, forum. Enjoy your day!
Well, there are private forums where that's allowed. And we tried that with a now defunct forum wherein we set up a political sub-forum that was visible to members who wanted to join, and otherwise inaccessible. This was set up to satisfy a desire by some members to have the freedom to enter into political discussion. It sort of became the intellectual equivalent of dwarf mud wresting, mixed with a dose of racism and misogyny.
In a world where nearly every aspect of human life and knowledge has been politicized, it tends to be difficult to discuss anything without “politics” entering into it.
Fortunately there will soon be a solution...you’ll be able to utilize an auto-reply robot to post for you:
Fortunately there will soon be a solution...you’ll be able to utilize an auto-reply robot to post for you:
Large doses of racism and misogyny!
A tobacco legislation thread can start very well but, will usually up in flames, upside down by the tracks. Some members are incapable of sticking to discussing and can only resort to name calling and denigrating other views rather than taking the other side's position apart point by point in a civil and cogent manner. They simply do not know how to argue a point nor will they recognize and acknowledge any valid point if there is basic disagreement with their chosen position.
It is simply the nature of public, unmoderated debate. In a battle of wits ... some are simply, unarmed.
A tobacco legislation thread can start very well but, will usually up in flames, upside down by the tracks. Some members are incapable of sticking to discussing and can only resort to name calling and denigrating other views rather than taking the other side's position apart point by point in a civil and cogent manner. They simply do not know how to argue a point nor will they recognize and acknowledge any valid point if there is basic disagreement with their chosen position.
It is simply the nature of public, unmoderated debate. In a battle of wits ... some are simply, unarmed.
I agree with aldecaker. One political stance we all agree on, put in the most minimalist terms, is that we don't want government actions to influence our pipe smoking. The end. What else is there to discuss, and why?
Actually, I think most people want both of those things and do not see them as mutually exclusive.
There is an arena already for political debates, where friends can quickly become enemies and delete one another at their will. It's called facebook.
"Stick to the substance of the legislation and to an objective reporting of it rather than one's personal opinions and wider bias."
That would be great, Jesse, but our 100% failure rate at that leads me to believe it will never happen. Keeping apprised of tobacco legislation would be nice; the only way I can see it working is to have a bulletin-board type section where someone could post said information, and there is no reply function whatsoever. The information gets presented, members read it, and there is no ensuing descent into madness. If it is not presented in an impartial manner, the mods could zap it before hackles get raised.
That would be great, Jesse, but our 100% failure rate at that leads me to believe it will never happen. Keeping apprised of tobacco legislation would be nice; the only way I can see it working is to have a bulletin-board type section where someone could post said information, and there is no reply function whatsoever. The information gets presented, members read it, and there is no ensuing descent into madness. If it is not presented in an impartial manner, the mods could zap it before hackles get raised.
What a complete, total, absolute, unmitigated, spectacularly dim-witted idiot you are for having such a view, Warren. And your mother was no better. In fact, she was probably a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries! Not to mention your dog... you doubtless have a stupid dog, too.
Hi! I'm Gus, Warren's dawg. I aver that I am indeed smarter than he is. He waits on me hand and foot. It does, at times, take an undue length of time for him to understand what I want. But, all and all, I get fed on time and that's the main consideration. In return I take him outside from time to time so he can throw a ball (He's too lazy to get it himself), walk around the neighborhood, get a bit of exercise as it were.
Oh, I also typed this without the use of opposable thumbs. So, I'm more dexterous than he is also.
Oh, I also typed this without the use of opposable thumbs. So, I'm more dexterous than he is also.
I agree totally with the OP. No debate/argument here will stop FDA Intrusions into our lives. Spend that capital at the voter box. Aldecakers bulletinboard idea would work for the regurgitation of media on legislation and tobacco tax info. But would probably be a pain in the ass for the mods.
- Status