PDA

View Full Version : Users who impose their beliefs on others



matthew
December 3rd, 2007, 11:43 AM
I am posting this as a user, who also happens to be a staff member and an admin...this is not an official statement from the forums council (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ForumCouncil), the forums staff (http://ubuntuforums.org/showgroups.php), or anyone else. This is my personal little rant.

matthew

--------

Every once in a while I get a private message from a user, or we find a reported post, or someone posts something like this in a thread. The following is a direct quote, with some things removed to obscure the specific user and thread. No other editing was done.


i would like to report that a user on this forum has offended me very much by using bad language. I know last time this happened and i emailed you guys you did nothing. I am sick of being offended and nothing is ever done about it.

he said the P word in *link* .

I am very religious and the bible says this word is not right to use. please make sure he does not offend me or my beliefs again.Okay, where do I start?

First off, I have read the Bible. I have also read the Qur'an, and several other religious texts. I can't recall any of them forbidding the use of any word that starts with the letter 'p'. Specific individuals may be offended by the use of some words, but let's not pretend that is a matter that can be finally and authoritatively decided by any specific religious text.

I like to call this person a Holy Misroller (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=1032102) (see the second post, about 3/4 of the way down). Holy Misrollers are those online forum participants who give Christians (or other religious adherents) a bad name. The HM believes himself or herself to be a Christian (etc.) and will generally tell anyone who'll listen about his or her faith in God and in Jesus. At the same time, however, the HM will display decidedly un-Christian behavior, frequently making an *** out of him- or herself. The HM is often characterized by a great deal of anger and hostility. The breed tends to lash out at anyone and anything not in keeping with its incorrectly narrow worldview. The saddest part about HMs is that they do not truly understand Christianity at all.

That last line is important. I am not criticizing all adherents of any faith or philosophy. I am criticizing the arrogant and self-righteous from among them. This is a small, but vocal minority among people of strong belief.

I should pause here to emphasize that Christianity is not the only religion that has problems with people doing this. Fundamentalists exist in all religions and can also be found among the non-religious. Think about specific forms of open-source/free software zealots who complain incessantly about people who make choices different from the ones they would make. We could point to various political factions as well. Please, no one think that I am intending to pick on one specific faith or belief system. I'm not anti-faith in any way, neither am I anti-politics or against having strong beliefs. I am anti-arrogance.

I am happy to have religious users in these forums. I am also happy to have non-religious users in these forums. I am happy that users of various nationalities, ethnicities, genders and ages all come and participate in this community. I am thrilled to welcome people with strong beliefs as well as people with weak ones. I like people. Period.

In these forums we have a code of conduct (http://ubuntuforums.org/index.php?page=policy) for behavior. Anything that is not covered by that code of conduct is permitted. When we (the Forums Council (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ForumCouncil)) discover a hole in the code of conduct (http://ubuntuforums.org/index.php?page=policy), we discuss the problem and modify the code as needed.

This does not include modifying our style of moderation on the basis of zealots of any persuasion, whether they be religious, free-software, political or of some other sort.

I am glad to allow anyone who participates in these forums to believe, think, and act as they will (within the CoC (http://ubuntuforums.org/index.php?page=policy) while in the forums). I am in no way willing to allow those beliefs, philosophical or religious, to coerce other forums users to fit in the sometimes small boxes that some users have.

It is the ultimate of arrogance that some people believe that their specific religious or philosophical tendencies should govern the actions of other people. It's no wonder that some very good religious and philosophical beliefs have terrible reputations when their adherents behave in this manner.

So, that is my long-winded way of saying that the guy quoted above and others like him either need to "suck it up (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=suck+it+up)" and allow others to speak/write as they will within the forums CoC (http://ubuntuforums.org/index.php?page=policy), or they need to leave. We are not going to come to any deeper agreement on that. Our rules are very clear and are designed to foster mutual respect among members. That goes both ways. For things that are not universal in nature, like the use of specific words that many, perhaps most people do not find offensive, then we need to choose to treat those whose opinions differ from ours as we would like them to treat us.

Here's my main problem: I'm really tired of people saying they want everyone to follow their system of belief or personal philosophy of life (all software must be free or else...join my religion or else...etc.) and then threatening the staff because we don't allow those demands to be made. Seriously, guys (and it almost always is a male...), if you want people to follow your way of life, all you have to do is show us how, and why it is better, by being a better person than the people around you. If you want people to follow you, lead by example with respect, with kindness, and yes, with good and logical arguments that do not demean those who disagree with you, but rather show a better option than what they are presenting.

Okay, I'm done with my tirade. I feel better now.

bapoumba
December 3rd, 2007, 11:50 AM
Huge +1 :KS

PmDematagoda
December 3rd, 2007, 12:08 PM
I agree completely with what you say matthew.:)

lyceum
December 3rd, 2007, 12:14 PM
+1

Can't we all just get along! :D

Seriously though, is everyone is worried about stepping on someone's toes, no one will ever talk! There is a line to be drawn in society, but really if you don't like something DON'T READ IT!

koleoptero
December 3rd, 2007, 12:14 PM
It must really be a tough job moderating a forum with so many thousands of users.I would have worn out the ban button. :lolflag:

And I agree with you about such behavior. I'm happy to know the forum is in good hands.

Laervian
December 3rd, 2007, 12:23 PM
Huge +10 :D. Sadly this kind of behaviour is very common nowadays, considering the integralist surge in many religions in the last 10 years (and IMHO many religious leaders do give very bad examples about this). I am not surprised to see that this kind of arrogance spawns here on these forums too, but I am very glad to see that it holds no sway whatsoever on the staff or the community in general. :)

anaconda
December 3rd, 2007, 12:33 PM
Ok.. now I am interested.

What is the "p" word? I cant remember ANY insulting word starting with p..

pagan?

popey
December 3rd, 2007, 12:38 PM
Ok.. now I am interested.

What is the "p" word? I cant remember ANY insulting word starting with p..

pagan?

pclinuxos

:)

LaRoza
December 3rd, 2007, 12:58 PM
pclinuxos

:)

flamebaiter :-)

ZeBob
December 3rd, 2007, 01:01 PM
ROFL, this quote is amazing !

LaRoza
December 3rd, 2007, 01:04 PM
I agree no one should impose their beliefs on others, except the forum's code of conduct.

xyz
December 3rd, 2007, 01:05 PM
Well done Matthew...very well done...I take mine rare...even bleu.

Jonne
December 3rd, 2007, 01:13 PM
We need a Firefox extension that filters out/replaces offending words for the easily offended (when loading websites, not when posting). The easily offended can install it, while the rest of us can use whichever words we want...

de_valentin
December 3rd, 2007, 01:16 PM
I can't recall any of them forbidding the use of any word that starts with the letter 'p'.
You said Pee :lolflag:

But seriously, I couldn't agree more

matthew
December 3rd, 2007, 01:19 PM
Ok.. now I am interested.

What is the "p" word? I cant remember ANY insulting word starting with p..

pagan?lol. The offensive phrase was "pissed off."


I think the worst are the atheists who believe that since they are right, no one else has the right to express such "stupid" beliefs.

Also, any conversation about religious issues seems to turn to a Christian bashing arena, look at "Crazy".Yeah, it definitely goes in multiple directions. It is absolutely not my desire to bash Christians or members of any other faith. I do note with some satisfaction that Jesus wasn't very easy on the religious fundamentalists of his day, the Pharisees. I think that is our real analog here, not the average Christian who is just trying to live well and treat others with the kindness they have received.

There are certainly ugly zealots among the atheist crowd as well, and among the Free Software crowd--but I wouldn't paint all members of either group the same color and say that anyone who believes that there is no God, or that believes that all software should be free (as in freedom) and open source is going to act in a bad manner. There are also people like this in Islam, and I've met a few really pushy Hari Krishnas, which is just as ironic and annoying.

In all these cases, it is the (unfortunately quite vocal) minority.

Again, I'm not against faith or strong beliefs. I'm against arrogance. I have some pretty strong beliefs myself, but I live by them, welcoming anyone who asks me about them and is interested, and choose never to push them on others.

rye_
December 3rd, 2007, 01:26 PM
I think the worst are the atheists who believe that since they are right, no one else has the right to express such "stupid" beliefs.

Also, any conversation about religious issues seems to turn to a Christian bashing arena, look at "Crazy".

I am suddenly aware that in this reply I am moving away from the spirit of this thread, but I can't help myself;

Religion, all religion, is some extent (and usually all the way) a statement of groundless, ill thought out repetition, I'm sure all will agree this is a statement of fact. Why would those of us who have not opted for such a way of life wish to be castigated because we have not been convinced that religion (cult, sect etc.) A B or C is 'correct'.

Sorry again,

Ryan

23meg
December 3rd, 2007, 01:27 PM
Also, any conversation about religious issues seems to turn to a Christian bashing arena, look at "Crazy".

What is "Christian bashing"? Please define it.

matthew
December 3rd, 2007, 01:43 PM
I am suddenly aware that in this reply I am moving away from the spirit of this thread, but I can't help myself;

Religion, all religion, is some extent (and usually all the way) a statement of groundless, ill thought out repetition, I'm sure all will agree this is a statement of fact. Why would those of us who have not opted for such a way of life wish to be castigated because we have not been convinced that religion (cult, sect etc.) A B or C is 'correct'.

Sorry again,

RyanBeing sorry is different from saying you are sorry. You intended to start us veering off on a different path. You are sorry this is going to be taken as rude, but you aren't sorry for doing it. ;)

Also, you are dangerously close to providing a good example of what I am talking about..."I'm sure all will agree?" I'm not. In fact, I'm sure many will disagree and that your comments will give rise to a flame fest if I don't put a stop to it.

Sheesh. Should I just mention Hitler now and Godwin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law) the whole thread?

:lolflag:

People, let's keep the posts on topic, please. Thank you.

tageiru
December 3rd, 2007, 01:57 PM
I think the worst are the atheists who believe that since they are right, no one else has the right to express such "stupid" beliefs.

Also, any conversation about religious issues seems to turn to a Christian bashing arena, look at "Crazy".

Reading your post, you come across as a person who is part of the problem. On one hand you condemn atheists for not allowing free expression of beliefs and on the other complain about criticism of christianity as "bashing".

Altarbo
December 3rd, 2007, 02:48 PM
What is "Christian bashing"? Please define it.You knock 'em out with a bat and drag them to the Colosseum . . .


;-)I kid.

@Matthew: This is really bad. Bad bad. Are you alright bad. What'd you take bad. But I read about half way into you post thinking the p word was "proprietary." I wrote one, simple, nothing-to-it, hello-world window manager and my mind has GNU/rotted away. Anyway, I'll pray for you(r forums' sanity.)

Nano Geek
December 3rd, 2007, 02:49 PM
What is "Christian bashing"? Please define it.From what I've seen at least, I'd define "Christian bashing" as a group of non-religious people who, not having any Christians (or a different faith depending on the topic) start making jokes about God, the Bible, or believers themselves.

But I agree with Matthew's post. It's not good for anyone when someone acts that way (although I'm probably as guilty of that as anyone. I hate self-conviction :( )

n3tfury
December 3rd, 2007, 02:49 PM
"pissed off" offended someone? rofl. get a grip whoever you are. good luck in the real world.

Scarath
December 3rd, 2007, 02:55 PM
Welcome to the Internet

Those easily offended or of a nervous disposition please look away now.

plun
December 3rd, 2007, 03:12 PM
Well, I don't believe this is a question about traditional religions....

More about software religion (read Stallman) and community "tensions"....:-\"

Now we have a situation with devs and advanced users with
ideological "high standards".

This is taken from a famous site:

"New users tend to favor immediate functionality over long-term ideological gains"...........

Well, well.....fighting Automatix is also a mainly ideological issue...

:)

hanzomon4
December 3rd, 2007, 04:10 PM
Great post, I think part of the problem is that we only listen to each other in an effort to prove the other person wrong or change their mind over their beliefs. I know I've been guilty of this. If we could just accept that we disagree on things and leave it at that, instead of trying to prove our point of view as "right", many of these problems could be avoided.

maniacmusician
December 3rd, 2007, 04:24 PM
Being the person that the quote in the OP was directed at, I'm sort of amazed. Said user also sent me a PM with similar wording, and up until this very moment, I couldn't figure out what I had said that had offended him! "Pissed off"? I almost can't believe it.

I just also want to give brief background to the quote; the thread was the Wife one that many of you may have seen and the whole thread basically consisted of making jokes about wives, writing lists of how to deal with wives, exchanging tips and tricks on how to stay in control of your marriage, and how to get out of doing domestic chores. I basically condemned it for its sexism. That's all.

As to this current thread, Matthew, I totally agree with you. There's a certain amount of respect that all sides need to have in this issue. I think a big factor in it is that we talk and argue about a lot of personal beliefs like the existence of God, and following the teachings of the Bible, and these are very easy to get angry/excited over. As an atheist (perhaps Agnostic would fit better), I rarely engage people in arguments over personal beliefs like that.

I don't feel like I need to convert other people to atheism or convince them that this thing they've believed in their whole life is a lie (not implying that it is -- don't attack me on this). I think that a belief as large and influential as "God exists" or "God doesn't exist" is a decision that people have to make completely on their own, if they want to end up truly believing in it.

What I do attack, however, are religious (and non-religious) institutions that behave in a manner that's completely inhumane, and often times, without rational reason.For a mild example of this; a dear friend of mine is a teacher at a Catholic school. Last week, they decided to ban the movie "Golden Compass" for all Catholics. Their primary reasons seemed to be that author of the story was an atheist. Having watched the movie, my friend the teacher concluded that there were no anti-religion sentiments in the movie, nothing that would say to little kids "God is bad, don't believe in him". That's a mild example of a religious institution doing something unfair that's not based on solid reason; of course, the worst thing that happens here is that those kids don't get to see Golden Compass.

A more extreme example is Westboro Baptist Church and their God Hates Fags campaign. It's just simply disgusting and inhumane. I can't believe those people call themselves human.

I realize this is heading slightly in the wrong direction. Yes, non-religious institutions do a lot of horrible things too, and I try to call them out on it and campaign against them. We need to, as a community, condemn inhumane actions in all institutions, regardless of how religious they are.

I realize this is still heading in the wrong direction....and I don't know how to get it back on track. I'll just end with saying that, don't let a fear of offending people or stepping over religious lines stop you from criticising an action that is just wrong.

And also, don't be like this guy, who startist a sexist thread, got angry when I posted a response deconstructing his arguments and calling him out on it, complained to the mods citing religious reasons, and sent me this PM when I asked him which thread he was complaining about:



the wife one. You must be an angry wife? or are you one of the porr sods with no pants in the family?

learn to take a joke!

Sexism runs rampant in the world and even us men should be able to see it.

[shelters head from being beaten with the way, way off-topic stick]

hanzomon4
December 3rd, 2007, 04:29 PM
^OT post!!!!

Cut his freaking head off! :lolflag:

compiledkernel
December 3rd, 2007, 05:15 PM
Sadly Matthew I suspect that these are the very same people that believe that Christ and the disciples sat around the table during the Last Supper and drank grape juice (rather than wine, and yes, ive run into my fair share of people that actually believe this, because how could a spirited drink ever touch the lips of the Saviour).

Speaking purely as a Pagan myself, I find such actions, statements, and thoughts detestable. I would rather invite those people to examine their faith more closely, and learn less to judge others. I surely do not judge anyone for what they think or believe.

23meg
December 3rd, 2007, 05:43 PM
From what I've seen at least, I'd define "Christian bashing" as a group of non-religious people who, not having any Christians (or a different faith depending on the topic) start making jokes about God, the Bible, or believers themselves.

Ridiculing faith is silly and childish. It doesn't accomplish anything other than annoying those with faith and making enemies.

Presenting reasoned arguments against belief systems and institutions behind them, without making things personal or infringing people's freedom to believe in whatever they want, however, should be acceptable.

Often, the latter gets pigeonholed with the former, and other nasty attitudes, under the term "$RELIGION bashing". Any negative comment on institutions related to Christianity becomes "Christian bashing". Anything said against Islamic extremism becomes "Islamophobia". I find that unacceptable.

Linuxratty
December 3rd, 2007, 05:43 PM
Huge +1 :KS

And from me:
:KS:KS:KS:KS:KS

I so do agree with you and the arrogance and self righteousnesses
of these people just drives me nuts! I want to whack um upside the head and yell:"STOP IT!"
I am NOT going to live by your rules and I do not give a sparrow's fart about your religious beliefs...I also do not care what your religious texts say either...So I'll keep my atheist beliefs to myself if you will take your religious beliefs and keep them to yourself.
And if you don't like it,don't read my comments.
So there.

Tomosaur
December 3rd, 2007, 05:57 PM
I hereby lay the foundations of the following movement:

"HUG A BELIEVER"

Since there are so many angry religious individuals wandering around out there, what better to cheer them up than to give them a hug?

Linuxratty
December 3rd, 2007, 06:00 PM
We need a Firefox extension that filters out/replaces offending words for the easily offended (when loading websites, not when posting). The easily offended can install it, while the rest of us can use whichever words we want...

Does that mean I can have words filtered out that I don't want to read,such as Jesus,god,bible,etc.?
J/K:)

DMK62
December 3rd, 2007, 06:12 PM
Just my 2 cents worth....

Any form of belief taken to extremes in my opinion is dangerous. It gets even more dangerous when that extreme belief is forced onto others by an individual, institution, or state.

I think the Ubuntu philosophy of humanity towards others is a good place to start. We should all strive to show understanding and respect to others whenever possible in these forums as well as in day to day life. Make an effort to expand your knowledge and understanding of other beliefs. If you do unintentionally offend someone then do your best to try and find out why it was offensive.

Backtracking to the extreme beliefs when enforced by an institution or state. I think that in most cases the underlying reason for it is that they know it gives them POWER over others.

To the Ubuntu forum staff ... You do a great job here on the forums. Your posts ( and non staff posts ) have helped me over and over again . Thank You !!!

Dale

FuturePilot
December 3rd, 2007, 06:32 PM
+1 to matthew's first post.

hackle577
December 3rd, 2007, 06:53 PM
Wow, very nice post matthew! Ginormous +1

n3tfury
December 3rd, 2007, 06:55 PM
Wow, very nice post matthew! Ginormous +1

"Ginormous"

who the hell came up with that this holiday season? rubbish.

Tomosaur
December 3rd, 2007, 06:59 PM
"Ginormous"

who the hell came up with that this holiday season? rubbish.

Ginormous is a 'disputed' real word. It is used frequently enough that many dictionaries include it, but not all of them. It's kind of surprising that some people have still never heard it, but it's not a new word, really.

n3tfury
December 3rd, 2007, 07:01 PM
Ginormous is a 'disputed' real word. It is used frequently enough that many dictionaries include it, but not all of them. It's kind of surprising that some people have still never heard it, but it's not a new word, really.

as disputed it should be...

hackle577
December 3rd, 2007, 07:06 PM
"Ginormous" is a real word. I know this because it's used by ginormous amounts of people. ;-)

hackle577
December 3rd, 2007, 07:08 PM
Also: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ginormous

That says it's been in existence since 1948-1953!

Jonne
December 3rd, 2007, 07:09 PM
Does that mean I can have words filtered out that I don't want to read,such as Jesus,god,bible,etc.?
J/K:)
Sure, it could filter out whatever you'd want, and this also means forum software doesn't need any useless naughty words filters. I'd personally just use it to filter out the word 'blogosphere'.

matthew
December 3rd, 2007, 07:17 PM
Ridiculing faith is silly and childish. It doesn't accomplish anything other than annoying those with faith and making enemies.

Presenting reasoned arguments against belief systems and institutions behind them, without making things personal or infringing people's freedom to believe in whatever they want, however, should be acceptable.

Often, the latter gets pigeonholed with the former, and other nasty attitudes, under the term "$RELIGION bashing". Any negative comment on institutions related to Christianity becomes "Christian bashing". Anything said against Islamic extremism becomes "Islamophobia". I find that unacceptable.+1

Any faith, philosophy, or software that cannot be reasonably questioned is horribly insecure. A belief system that is solid, that one can have faith and trust in, should be able to stand up to reasonable questioning. To think that an omnipotent God would exist that would/could be unsettled or nervous about his creations questioning his existence, etc., seems ridiculous to me.


Any form of belief taken to extremes in my opinion is dangerous. It gets even more dangerous when that extreme belief is forced onto others by an individual, institution, or state.To some extent, I agree. I will also say that I have no problem with people having strong feelings, beliefs or opinions. What I object to is the hardheadedness that sometimes accompanies those opinions, specifically the expectation that because a person holds certain opinions, now others are expected and required to follow them.

I like that Richard Stallman, for example, really believes in software freedom and is willing to make personal sacrifices in his pursuit of that freedom. I don't appreciate it when someone might say to me that I am not free to use a binary video driver if I want to do so.

hackle577
December 3rd, 2007, 07:18 PM
I'd personally just use it to filter out the word 'blogosphere'.

You, sir, have inspired a topic (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=630479)!

rustybronco
December 3rd, 2007, 07:33 PM
Of all the things in life to obtain, I think humility is one of the hardest.

Good post, Matthew.

Jonne
December 3rd, 2007, 07:39 PM
You, sir, have inspired a topic (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=630479)!
I guess it's a start, but I'd rather see someone write that Firefox extension I want ;). I think it's essential to move the burden of censoring stuff to the people that are easily offended, instead of having a vocal minority (in a different country) force content creators and discussion boards to censor their content.

steveneddy
December 3rd, 2007, 07:42 PM
I would like to complain about people using poor grammar.

For instance, using the word your for the word you're, as in

You're welcome, instead they write - your welcome.

This is driving me NUTS!!!

Can you fix that for me please, Matthew?

:popcorn:

p_quarles
December 3rd, 2007, 07:49 PM
I would like to complain about people using poor grammar.
You do realize that phrase contains a dangling participle, right?

:D

gn2
December 3rd, 2007, 08:03 PM
I wholeheartedly agree that religious zealots of any persuasion are a total PITA and should be given a vigorous ignoring to.

I would also like to see the various Ubuntu "insert religion here" Editions being done away with.

Ubuntu should be inclusive, having all these various religious based editions is divisive in my opinion.

As for earlier posts about grammar and use of language, I believe that there is no such thing as incorrect grammar or words, all language is in a continuous series of development and change.

However there is one thing that does really annoy me and that is replacing have with of, as in That schoolteacher shouldn't of been jailed for naming a teddy bear Mohammed.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7125572.stm

maniacmusician
December 3rd, 2007, 08:26 PM
You do realize that phrase contains a dangling participle, right?

:D
The first line of your signature fits perfectly here. And nice call on the grammar :) People use shortcuts on forums and whatnot because it saves them time typing, apparently. They don't like it when they have to be careful about grammar and spelling, which I agree is a mistake in the long term. It hurts your presentation when you meet people online, it throws you into stereotypes that you probably don't fit into (specially if u tlk lke ths), and it degrades the writing skills that you'll need in the real world. If you use reasonably proper english all the time, it becomes a habit and helps you make less mistakes when writing something important that you don't want coming off as written by a child. Hooray.

I wholeheartedly agree that religious zealots of any persuasion are a total PITA and should be given a vigorous ignoring to.

I would also like to see the various Ubuntu "insert religion here" Editions being done away with.

Ubuntu should be inclusive, having all these various religious based editions is divisive in my opinion.

As for earlier posts about grammar and use of language, I believe that there is no such thing as incorrect grammar or words, all language is in a continuous series of development and change.

However there is one thing that does really annoy me and that is replacing have with of, as in That schoolteacher shouldn't of been jailed for naming a teddy bear Mohammed.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7125572.stm

The various religion based offshoots of Ubuntu have already been discussed several times, and while I also am not their biggest fan, the fact remains that it will build stronger communities. It's not about Ubuntu being exclusive of them, it's about them having this normal Ubuntu community and also one that's connected to something more personal in their lives, giving them a stronger sense of community. I'm not a fan of organized religion, so that's my reason for disliking the religious offshoots, but for a lot of people, it really makes the difference, and as long as their projects aren't hurting the main Ubuntu project (and they're not), I don't have a serious problem with it. That being said, this has been discussed way too many times, so if you want to discuss it again, either revive one of the older threads (please don't) or we can drop it (let's :))

popch
December 3rd, 2007, 08:46 PM
First of all, thank you, Matthew and all you other gals and guys for keeping this such a nice place.

Being an employee, I have a much simpler life than you appear to be having. If I do not like the requests of someone, I can just tell them that my Management(TM) did not Authorize(TM) me to comply with this sort of thing. I am very sorry sir or madam. This tends to keep quite a few discussions short.

What I don't quite understand: I suspect those people use Ubuntu CE anyway; does this not furnish a filter against foul language?

Nano Geek
December 3rd, 2007, 08:57 PM
First of all, thank you, Matthew and all you other gals and guys for keeping this such a nice place.

Being an employee, I have a much simpler life than you appear to be having. If I do not like the requests of someone, I can just tell them that my Management(TM) did not Authorize(TM) me to comply with this sort of thing. I am very sorry sir or madam. This tends to keep quite a few discussions short.

What I don't quite understand: I suspect those people use Ubuntu CE anyway; does this not furnish a filter against foul language?Some use Windows, some use other distros. I personally use Ubuntu just because that's what I started with. Besides, this is supposed to be a family-friendly forum. PG rated language isn't appropriate here.

sloggerkhan
December 3rd, 2007, 09:01 PM
I liked your post Matthew. I can't decide if I'm an offender or not.
Certainly I like a vigorous discussion of controversial issues. Sometimes I feel like I post some rather crazy things hoping to get some good responses and arguments back and instead just get ideological static. Oh well.
And I agree with whoever posted that you can't seem to discuss a lot of topics without being labeled a *phobe by people who dislike having a pleasant and nuanced argument with lots of hyperbole.


As a side note, my Mom doesn't like it if anyone uses the word ****.
I sure don't think it's a swear word, but among some people it certainly isn't thought of as classy vocab.

popch
December 3rd, 2007, 09:12 PM
Besides, this is supposed to be a family-friendly forum. PG rated language isn't appropriate here.

Yes. But.

The quote in the OP does not refer to PG rated language. I think anyone with that narrow a standard should use the technology available to him or her and not bother others to build protective walls for them.

Nano Geek
December 3rd, 2007, 09:13 PM
Yes. But.

The quote in the OP does not refer to PG rated language. I think anyone with that narrow a standard should use the technology available to him or her and not bother others to build protective walls for them.Sorry, I thought that you were referring to the idea of language filters for Firefox that someone proposed.
What are you talking about then?

lswest
December 3rd, 2007, 09:20 PM
i strongly agree with that, i mean online communities should all be equal and if you go on one, be sure to leave religion at the door (faith-wise i don't believe in anything, so yea:P), because no matter what you believe, someone online won't, and if that offends you, just avoid that forum. Not much else you can do about it.

forrestcupp
December 3rd, 2007, 09:22 PM
if you want people to follow your way of life, all you have to do is show us how, and why it is better, by being a better person than the people around you. If you want people to follow you, lead by example with respect, with kindness, and yes, with good and logical arguments that do not demean those who disagree with you, but rather show a better option than what they are presenting.
I am a Christian, and I think this is very well said. You don't get people to become a Christian by ranting and preaching. It's better to show people the benefits of it by your example and testimony.

About the whole **** thing. The King James Version of the Bible actually mentions people who "pisseth against a wall" 6 times, and that's really what it's talking about. It doesn't say it's an offensive word, it actually uses the word in context.

I hate profanity and I don't use it, but it doesn't offend me when others use it, unless it's around children. What does offend me is when someone who claims to be a Christian does un-Christian like things regularly. The non-religious are going to act non-religious, but Christians should act like Christians.

compiledkernel
December 3rd, 2007, 09:25 PM
Assuming there are some 2 billion-ish Christians, 1.5 billion-ish muslims, and 1 billion secularly faithed people (atheist, agnostic, deistic) , and roughly 1 billion of everyone else (judaica, shinto, hindu, buddist, and other eastern religions) , I have to aggre with lswest.

MalfunctioningMartian
December 3rd, 2007, 10:29 PM
It's a fact that there are millions of believers on this planet and probably quite a few on this forum.

The CoC says "Be considerate" and "Be respectful". This to me clearly says that people who would object to the misuse of the Lords name (Not religious extremists, but simply people who take their faith seriously) should be treated with respect and that this forum be a family friendly and acceptable place for all. Including religious people.

Don't get me wrong. I think that infrequent use of mild non-religious swearwords isn't worth acting upon. I am complaining about religious swearwords.


First off, I have read the Bible. I have also read the Qur'an, and several other religious texts. I can't recall any of them forbidding the use of any word that starts with the letter 'p'.

But the bible does say: "You must not use the name of the Lord your God thoughtlessly; the Lord will punish anyone who misuses his name"

My post in a nutshell:
Non-religious swearwords should not be taken too seriously, However religious swearwords are another matter and it is only considerate that they should not be allowed.

n3tfury
December 3rd, 2007, 10:55 PM
It's a fact that there are millions of believers on this planet and probably quite a few on this forum.

The CoC says "Be considerate" and "Be respectful". This to me clearly says that people who would object to the misuse of the Lords name (Not religious extremists, but simply people who take their faith seriously) should be treated with respect and that this forum be a family friendly and acceptable place for all. Including religious people.

Don't get me wrong. I think that infrequent use of mild non-religious swearwords isn't worth acting upon. I am complaining about religious swearwords.



But the bible does say: "You must not use the name of the Lord your God thoughtlessly; the Lord will punish anyone who misuses his name"

My post in a nutshell:
Non-religious swearwords should not be taken too seriously, However religious swearwords are another matter and it is only considerate that they should not be allowed.

what religious swear words ARE allowed? i can't think of any, so i'm not sure where you're going with that post.

compiledkernel
December 3rd, 2007, 11:27 PM
Id have to think using words like Yahweh, Elohim, and Jehovah right off in a profane manner would qualify as a christian swear word. Likewise calling "God" out for something might as well be considered as a christian swear word.

Alternately of course, improper use of the world Muhammad (and may of its variations in spelling) would also be considered bad.

thsths
December 4th, 2007, 12:03 AM
flamebaiter :-)Wouldn't that have to be pflamebaiter?

MalfunctioningMartian
December 4th, 2007, 12:15 AM
what religious swear words ARE allowed? i can't think of any, so i'm not sure where you're going with that post.

"OMG" gets 5 pages in the search engine. :)

koenn
December 4th, 2007, 12:15 AM
Id have to think using words like Yahweh, Elohim, and Jehovah right off in a profane manner would qualify as a christian swear word. Likewise calling "God" out for something might as well be considered as a christian swear word.

Alternately of course, improper use of the world Muhammad (and may of its variations in spelling) would also be considered bad.

I can follow that so far. Yet, I'm not familiar with most ar all of the other religions. Also, English is not my native language, so I pick up slang from TV and books ...
Would a Christian consider 'holy cow !" a swearword ? Would a Hindu ? I don't know ... Is there a way to "blacklst" all words that might be offensive to anyone from any religion ? And if there is a way, would it even be a good idea ?
Wouldn't it be better just to stick with the Furum guidelines of respect and being polite ?

matthew
December 4th, 2007, 12:18 AM
Just FYI, everyone. I have received a couple of really grumpy private messages from two specific users who were certain I was referring to them when I wrote the post. I wasn't, but in retrospect I could have been. One was quite angry and has vowed not to participate in the forums, except in the technical areas...I told him I thought that was a wise decision and he wasn't real happy with me.

Count me officially amused.

On that note, I am going to get some sleep now.

floke
December 4th, 2007, 12:27 AM
The non-religious are going to act non-religious, but Christians should act like Christians.

...and what the hell (no pun intended) is that supposed to mean? Do you think that only religious people have the capacity to act in a humane and decent way? Are the non-religious some lesser form of life; the amoral dirt of humanity that you scrape off the soles of your holier-than-thou shoes? What a load of patronising guff.


religious swearwords are another matter and it is only considerate that they should not be allowed.


calling "God" out for something might as well be considered as a christian swear word. Alternately of course, improper use of the world Muhammad (and may of its variations in spelling) would also be considered bad.

I think we can all see where this approach to life ends up - except, of course, that we can't all see it, can we? The level to which you are offended by the use of religious wordage is equal to (in fact probably less than) the extent to which I am offended by the religious mob trying to dictate to the rest of us how we should behave. So now we have a dilemma: one of us is destined to be offended, so who's it to be? And by which criteria shall we decide?

LaRoza
December 4th, 2007, 12:27 AM
Count me officially amused.

On that note, I am going to get some sleep now.

Amuse count noted.

Good night.

LaRoza
December 4th, 2007, 12:28 AM
Wouldn't it be better just to stick with the Furum guidelines of respect and being polite ?

+1

n3tfury
December 4th, 2007, 12:37 AM
Id have to think using words like Yahweh, Elohim, and Jehovah right off in a profane manner would qualify as a christian swear word. Likewise calling "God" out for something might as well be considered as a christian swear word.

Alternately of course, improper use of the world Muhammad (and may of its variations in spelling) would also be considered bad.

lol, jesus. Elohim? Yahweh? what? most people won't go to that extent.

daimaru
December 4th, 2007, 12:38 AM
I support OP's opinion good job mate. totally agree with you. religion or politics has nothing to do with ubuntu. so chill people and keep your beliefs to yourselves.

messybricks
December 4th, 2007, 04:41 AM
First of all, props to Matthew... great points.

Second, I am a very strong Christian, and I feel extremely embarrassed for all the idiots out there claiming to be Christians and misrepresenting it. Too many think they know what's in the Bible 'cause they went to Sunday school.

That said, there are a few places in the Bible that frown upon Christians speaking profanely (See Eph. 5:4). Note that this is for Christians. I can't expect someone else to live by my set of guidelines. As someone said before, I can only live my life as an example, and hope that they follow.

Note also that profanity is very much subject to the environment. I don't consider "****" to be a profanity, but some people do. So, I try not to use it unless I'm around people I know won't care.



Quote:
Originally Posted by forrestcupp View Post
The non-religious are going to act non-religious, but Christians should act like Christians.

reply posted by floke:
...and what the hell (no pun intended) is that supposed to mean? Do you think that only religious people have the capacity to act in a humane and decent way? Are the non-religious some lesser form of life; the amoral dirt of humanity that you scrape off the soles of your holier-than-thou shoes? What a load of patronising guff.


This is not what the guy was saying (at least I hope not). All he meant was that if you are going to call yourself a Christian, there are certain things you should do, or at least try to do, for fear of becoming hypocritical. Unfortunately, there are plenty Christians showing less love than most non-Christians, when we're the ones who believe love to be the Greatest Commandment. (Matthew 22:37-40)

jimrz
December 4th, 2007, 05:21 AM
+1

Thank you Matthew for a well stated response which I believe represents the vast majority of forum members and, certainly, the spirit of ubuntu.

jflaker
December 4th, 2007, 05:28 AM
and I have always said of others who would like to censor radio or TV because somebody may be offended.

To those who may be offended, you have 2 options....change the channel or turn it off. In the case of this forum, there is an option in the user CP where you can ignore a specific user and you no longer have to see their offensive posts again........http://ubuntuforums.org/profile.php?do=editlist


make use of tools to censor people you no longer want to hear from in this forum and you can be happy and others can swear up a storm if they choose at the risk of being banned!

DirtDawg
December 4th, 2007, 07:09 AM
Seriously though, is everyone is worried about stepping on someone's toes, no one will ever talk! There is a line to be drawn in society, but really if you don't like something DON'T READ IT!

That's a fine thing to say, but when I open a thread with an innocent name like, oh I don't know, "wacky", and it ends up being some numbnut bashing an entire religion, I would call that an ambush.

Seriously, I avoided this forum for weeks because it seemed like every time I turned around there was a new thread written by some offensive jerk. Here in America, what OP Matthew refers to as, "the small, but vocal minority", is very, very rich and very, very loud. We are assaulted everyday with this garbage in the media and I (used to) come here to get away from it.

That said, I will take even more care from now on to watch for threads in the "New Posts" section that are from the Backyard with the intention of avoiding them. Would moderators consider occasionally appending thread titles to better suit the nature of the discussion?

macogw
December 4th, 2007, 07:17 AM
From what I've seen at least, I'd define "Christian bashing" as a group of non-religious people who, not having any Christians (or a different faith depending on the topic) start making jokes about God, the Bible, or believers themselves.

But I agree with Matthew's post. It's not good for anyone when someone acts that way (although I'm probably as guilty of that as anyone. I hate self-conviction :( )

Is joking really bashing? I wouldn't call making a "limp wrist" joke "gay bashing," and I'm a *** hag (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/***_hag). "Jesus is coming, look busy"-type jokes...same thing. Cursing someone out for $attribute is what I'd call bashing.

cinematography
December 4th, 2007, 07:21 AM
+1 :popcorn:

aysiu
December 4th, 2007, 07:31 AM
A forum of this size and international composition hangs in a delicate balance when it comes to what is "offensive."

One extreme is a virtually unmoderated forum, where only the loudest and most obnoxious posters dominate and intimidate.

The other extreme is an overly moderated forum, where anything that could be remotely considered by anybody to be offensive is silenced immediately.

What we want is a balance between the two extremes. We want enough freedom of speech to allow a diversity of opinions and community membership, but we want enough moderation so that people aren't scared away by how aggressive and uncouth the forums appear to be.

Since we are primarily a technical support forum (discussion and "fun" topics come second), we tend to lean toward erring on overmoderating, but pissed off is not swearing and if that phrase offends you, I'm afraid there are very few places on the internet you should be frequenting.

23meg
December 4th, 2007, 07:44 AM
That said, I will take even more care from now on to watch for threads in the "New Posts" section that are from the Backyard with the intention of avoiding them. Would moderators consider occasionally appending thread titles to better suit the nature of the discussion?

You can exclude that forum in your options page (http://ubuntuforums.org/profile.php?do=editoptions), and it won't show up on the main page, and searches and "New Posts" won't bring up the posts in it.

DirtDawg
December 4th, 2007, 08:55 AM
You can exclude that forum in your options page (http://ubuntuforums.org/profile.php?do=editoptions), and it won't show up on the main page, and searches and "New Posts" won't bring up the posts in it.

Thanks for that! :KS

handy
December 4th, 2007, 09:46 AM
Assuming there are some 2 billion-ish Christians, 1.5 billion-ish muslims, and 1 billion secularly faithed people (atheist, agnostic, deistic) , and roughly 1 billion of everyone else (judaica, shinto, hindu, buddist, and other eastern religions) , I have to aggre with lswest.

I believe that after Muslim's the Hindu's are the third largest religion on Earth.



My post in a nutshell:
Non-religious swearwords should not be taken too seriously, However religious swearwords are another matter and it is only considerate that they should not be allowed.

One big problem with expecting people to be sensitive to what may be found to be offensive to a certain group of believers of a religious belief, such as the use of words; is that mostly we are ignorant of what these words are. What offends one branch of one religion, is not deemed offensive by another branch of the same religion, let alone by a separate religion all together.

If we are not religiously inclined, the last thing we are going to do is study up on the words so as not to offend people who may have beliefs that we ultimately have no regard for.

So, I think that short of a Firefox plug-in, or something of that nature ([Edit:] see previous posts on this page :-)), the only solution is for those that are prone to offense in this manner need to find another way to protect themselves. If all else fails then they should not go where they are likely to be offended.

It is human nature to avoid being somewhere that has proven itself to be uncomfortable.

Changing the topic:

Thanks for your original post Mathew, I agree completely.

I do hang out in the religious thread from time to time, & have had some long running discussions in the past which got right down in there with a particular fundamentalist. He was obviously quite emotional & certainly inflexible. I sent him a P.M. at one point offering him my genuine personal respect & other words to try & lighten up his attitude, explaining that we were discussing a topic & not trying to personally bring each other down. It didn't have any noticeable effect unfortunately.

Anyone posting on religious/political topics motivated by thoughts of changing someone else's view is fooling themselves. Such a thing happening would be incredibly rare, which is why many won't go near the religious threads to start with.

So why do we post if not to change someone's view?

I think their are a range of reasons, personally for self education & sometimes amusement. Other's have been hurt by religion in their past & have emotional &/or mental pain motivating their response. There are also some that genuinely just like to bash religion for the joy of bashing it would seem.

From the pro-religion side; they may be defensive for a variety of reasons, they may be trying to convert, they may be trying to educate - which can combine into the previous two reasons as well; some come from a holier than though attitude & just have to talk down on the damned, unfortunately. It would be remiss of me not to mention the religious people that are genuinely really nice honest, caring people, though they are confident in their belief they also seem to be genuinely humble, & don't try to force it on anyone, nor do they defend it, in fact these people post rarely in the Backyard religious thread.

I have found many of the threads in the Backyard to be greatly educational with regards to humanity & the way it ticks. This is due to the great diversity of people from all over the world, different age groups & philosophies, be they religious/political, you name it? Wonderful stuff.

I too add my immense gratitude to all concerned with maintaining this magnificent forum, it's the best on the net imho! :KS

forrestcupp
December 4th, 2007, 03:03 PM
...and what the hell (no pun intended) is that supposed to mean? Do you think that only religious people have the capacity to act in a humane and decent way? Are the non-religious some lesser form of life; the amoral dirt of humanity that you scrape off the soles of your holier-than-thou shoes? What a load of patronising guff.

Boy oh boy. Of course that's not what I meant. If all there is to Christianity is being humane and acting decently, then I could see that what I said would be offensive. But those things are just a byproduct of a deeper spiritual change.

Anyone has the capacity to be a moral person, but it is expected of Christians. My point was that we shouldn't expect people who don't hold the same morals that we do to live like we do. But if someone is a Christian, they should be expected to attempt to live how God wants them to live.

Sometimes Christians screw up, and sometimes non-religious people live very moral lives.

And the question of the day: Why isn't this in the Backyard yet?

Bartender
December 4th, 2007, 03:40 PM
matthew -
I've gotten used to expressing myself the way everyone else does at my workplace. Very few sentences get by without a few swear words. The frequency and "severity" of the swear words are roughly proportionate to the amount of passion in the room at the time.

When people post at the forums and they don't cuss a lot I can't tell what they're trying to say.

For instance, when someone says, "Don't let Ubuntu install to the entire HDD if you want to keep your Windows partition", how important is that advice? Could you do that sometimes and get away with it? Without the appropriate level of swearing for emphasis I can't tell.

Can you do something about that?

Nano Geek
December 4th, 2007, 03:42 PM
matthew -
I've gotten used to expressing myself the way everyone else does at my workplace. Very few sentences get by without a few swear words. The frequency and "severity" of the swear words are roughly proportionate to the amount of passion in the room at the time.

When people post at the forums and they don't cuss a lot I can't tell what they're trying to say.

For instance, when someone says, "Don't let Ubuntu install to the entire HDD if you want to keep your Windows partition", how important is that advice? Could you do that sometimes and get away with it? Without the appropriate level of swearing for emphasis I can't tell.

Can you do something about that?So insteed we should say somethign like #@#$@%@%$#@^$Windows&$%*$#%^^@%&$&$#%^HDD%%@%^@%^$@%^@^Ubuntu!@$#%#@%@?

popch
December 4th, 2007, 03:47 PM
Anyone has the capacity to be a moral person, but it is expected of Christians.

I do not live as a Christian. However, I expect anyone to lead a moral life, not just Christians. I accept that not every one has the same standards, and therefore I expect people to live up to their own standards, and not to mine and even less to those prescribed by self-appointed dictators.

I do not accept anyone to set forth some petty rules of conduct which have no bearing on being a moral person, and I accept even less when those people expect that moderators here enforce those petty rules within this forum.

aaaantoine
December 4th, 2007, 04:24 PM
What I do attack, however, are religious (and non-religious) institutions that behave in a manner that's completely inhumane, and often times, without rational reason.For a mild example of this; a dear friend of mine is a teacher at a Catholic school. Last week, they decided to ban the movie "Golden Compass" for all Catholics. Their primary reasons seemed to be that author of the story was an atheist. Having watched the movie, my friend the teacher concluded that there were no anti-religion sentiments in the movie, nothing that would say to little kids "God is bad, don't believe in him". That's a mild example of a religious institution doing something unfair that's not based on solid reason; of course, the worst thing that happens here is that those kids don't get to see Golden Compass.


My dad was telling me about this. If Wikipedia isn't lying, I could see why Christians would want to avoid anything from the His Dark Materials book trilogy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Compass_(film)#Controversies

More specifically:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Amber_Spyglass


One of the most controversial elements of the story is the demise of the Authority, who meant to portray God as worshiped in today's dominant monotheistic religions. Not only is the Supreme Being unmasked as a decrepit and immoral fraud, but his passing is all the more ignominious as its value in the storytelling is barely a minor footnote.

And even though the script was adapted in such a way to stifle the element of religion, the source material is still what it is.

Hopefully this doesn't... ...**** you off. :mrgreen:

compiledkernel
December 4th, 2007, 04:50 PM
aaaantoine, I found the film to make only mild references to a group that a person could interpret as the church. I think its a stretch to assume that a child could make that kind of judgement (the Magisterium being so similar to the Catholic church) as to make such a connection, but perhaps Im wrong. The fear is that in watching the movie, one would be inclinded to read the novels (which are apparently drastically more expressive about the realtionship between the Magisterium and what one could assume is a church). I honestly find the film and its books no more discouraging and unchristian than the Harry Potter novels (ones that one could assume are vastly more unchristian than ever a book in the Northern Lights vien of literature).

I am neither Christian, nor Muslim, nor Atheist, yet I find the argument over offensiveness to a Christian interesting. It has always been my understanding as an outside observer, that Christians are to be temperate and good people. The basic tenet of which I believe to be living by example that others might as well. I surely dont do any different than that myself, but my faith isnt one known for attempting to reach out to the masses. Yet by leading what I believe to be a moral and ethical existence, if others are encouraged to do the same, then its good for them. Christian or Not.

Ive rarely run into any Christian that at the core wasnt intrinsically good. Yes, there are a few people I have run into that find my beliefs unplausible, and even in an element fantastical (and thus condemnable by their standards), causing them to attempt to either 1) convert me, 2) condemn me, or 3) utterly ignore me.

Nano Geek
December 4th, 2007, 05:00 PM
aaaantoine, I found the film to make only mild references to a group that a person could interpret as the church. I think its a stretch to assume that a child could make that kind of judgement (the Magisterium being so similar to the Catholic church) as to make such a connection, but perhaps Im wrong. The fear is that in watching the movie, one would be inclinded to read the novels (which are apparently drastically more expressive about the realtionship between the Magisterium and what one could assume is a church). I honestly find the film and its books no more discouraging and unchristian than the Harry Potter novels (ones that one could assume are vastly more unchristian than ever a book in the Northern Lights vien of literature).

I am neither Christian, nor Muslim, nor Atheist, yet I find the argument over offensiveness to a Christian interesting. It has always been my understanding as an outside observer, that Christians are to be temperate and good people. The basic tenet of which I believe to be living by example that others might as well. I surely dont do any different than that myself, but my faith isnt one known for attempting to reach out to the masses. Yet by leading what I believe to be a moral and ethical existence, if others are encouraged to do the same, then its good for them. Christian or Not.

Ive rarely run into any Christian that at the core wasnt intrinsically good. Yes, there are a few people I have run into that find my beliefs unplausible, and even in an element fantastical (and thus condemnable by their standards), causing them to attempt to either 1) convert me, 2) condemn me, or 3) utterly ignore me.It's not the movie itself so much that's causing the controversy, it's (from what I've heard) the books and to be more specific, the final book in the series.

Snopes.com has a good rundown of the church's problem with the series.

http://snopes.com/politics/religion/compass.asp

Jonne
December 4th, 2007, 05:06 PM
So insteed we should say somethign like #@#$@%@%$#@^$Windows&$%*$#%^^@%&$&$#%^HDD%%@%^@%^$@%^@^Ubuntu!@$#%#@%@?What? My mother was a saint! Get out!</zoidberg>

Tristam Green
December 4th, 2007, 05:19 PM
First off, +1 to Matthew for the OP.

Anyone, religious/non-religious, spiritual/non-spiritual alike, should be ashamed of himself if he tries to forcibly convert another person to his mode of thinking. Predestination and fate notwithstanding, it completely undermines the universally-accepted ideal of Free Will , and is deplorable even if those are taken into account.

As for me, I answer questions when asked (yes, Christian). I don't evangelize or prosetylize my beliefs based simply on the fact that some people just don't want to listen. Likewise, I surely don't *tell* someone blatantly that he is wrong for thinking one way or another, even if I feel as if he is.

/2bits.

Game_boy
December 4th, 2007, 06:46 PM
Religion should be a private thing. Religious people must adapt their standards to the majority view, justify their beliefs on non-irrational grounds, or not use the service. They cannot be awarded a higher priority because we must 'respect' their non-evidence-based views.

steveneddy
December 4th, 2007, 06:52 PM
You do realize that phrase contains a dangling participle, right?

:D

That means something pornographic, doesn't it?

:-k

fuscia
December 4th, 2007, 06:57 PM
i consider the P-word offensive to the beer i drink.

compiledkernel
December 4th, 2007, 07:12 PM
We all dont like Corona , Fuscia.

Its a matter of taste really.

handy
December 5th, 2007, 02:35 AM
A slice of lemon or lime in the throat of the bottle certainly strengthens up the flavor some, from memory... ;-)

floke
December 6th, 2007, 08:29 PM
That means something pornographic, doesn't it?

:-k

not if it's dangling!

Ripfox
January 3rd, 2008, 06:37 AM
pclinuxos

:)

HAHAHAHAHA

Presto123
January 3rd, 2008, 06:48 AM
Sadly Matthew I suspect that these are the very same people that believe that Christ and the disciples sat around the table during the Last Supper and drank grape juice (rather than wine, and yes, ive run into my fair share of people that actually believe this, because how could a spirited drink ever touch the lips of the Saviour).

Speaking purely as a Pagan myself, I find such actions, statements, and thoughts detestable. I would rather invite those people to examine their faith more closely, and learn less to judge others. I surely do not judge anyone for what they think or believe.

Ha! I agree with you. How could they become "merry with" grape juice?

I am an elder at my Church, too. (Point of that being: I, even as an elder, still see this as a simple "duh" kind of thing.)

toupeiro
January 3rd, 2008, 08:52 AM
:many edits:

I definately agree with some of the major points made in the inital post by Matthew, especially in regard to tolerance. But I don't agree with bringing what was directed in PM to a moderator/admin out for the general public in these forums...

My reasoning comes from a recent experience with forum administrators that had a very positive outcome. I had a post some weeks ago that I decided I would rather have removed than left out there, and had the moderator that so kindly assisted me decided rather to make an example out of my PM, make no mistake it would be my last post on these forums, technical or otherwise.

I don't pass judgment on others for their beliefs or choices in their lives, If you're happy with the choices YOU make and aren't harming anyone, then all the power in the world to you. All that being said, I would be pretty damn fired up if I addressed something to an admin in a PM and it was made a public example out of. Given the context, I don't think it matters how many similar messages that admin gets about the issue. However one person believes is how they believe. As a forum administrator, one of the hardest parts of your job is that you have to find a diplomatic way to handle things like this. If you want more members to respect the culture of and diversity these forums are made of, a great place for that to start is from our moderators by respecting the privacy of PM's. I'm not trying to say Matthew is a bad moderator, I do not feel that way one bit. Quite the contrary. Matthew in fact responded after the fact, to my request to remove my unwanted post and he was very respectful. It was the first time I had ever asked a moderator/admin to do something like this on this forum. I am only bringing this up because Matthew talked about leading by example, which is a very important part of the point he was making. I dont think some of the followup was a very good example of how moderators/admins should behave with PMs directed to them. If the user wanted it to be public, they would have posted publicly. Given the context, it really makes no difference if a name was used or not. His first post was pointed, very well written, and I think received well by the members. It was diplomatic and respectful. Having been a forum admin before for a rather large forum, I totally relate to how flustered some peoples PM's can get.

my .02

jespdj
January 3rd, 2008, 10:48 AM
+1 ! :KS

I hate it when people behave like "Hey, you got to respect my beliefs!" when they themselves don't respect the beliefs (or non-beliefs) of others.

Nunu
January 3rd, 2008, 12:07 PM
At the end of the day we are a community of hundreds of believes, religions. non religions, cultures etc. And all we can do is to respect what other people think, i have read a few post where offensive things have been said about my believes, but they where someone else's opinion about things and i respect that. Complaining to the admins is not going to solve it... Just Respect what the other person said and don't try and force your believes down on them. I am not a Christian i am a person that believes in God in my own way. I also believes that your traditions and culture defines your god. And that Al people who believes in a god is actually praying to the same god, it's your culture that changes the face of your god. But if someone else feels that i am wrong then i won't argue with him about it. And if Some one takes offense to "Pissed Off" then that is there opinion but then the person who is offended buy it should also respect the fact that the person who said it was not at a emotional point to say "I am Bitterly upset".

I will take my coat and leave now.

DoctorMO
January 3rd, 2008, 01:26 PM
I've decided to convert to Apathism, because you know I just don't care enough to answer the question any more.

matthew
January 4th, 2008, 12:27 AM
I definately agree with some of the major points made in the inital post by Matthew, especially in regard to tolerance. But I don't agree with bringing what was directed in PM to a moderator/admin out for the general public in these forums...

My reasoning comes from a recent experience with forum administrators that had a very positive outcome. I had a post some weeks ago that I decided I would rather have removed than left out there, and had the moderator that so kindly assisted me decided rather to make an example out of my PM, make no mistake it would be my last post on these forums, technical or otherwise.

I don't pass judgment on others for their beliefs or choices in their lives, If you're happy with the choices YOU make and aren't harming anyone, then all the power in the world to you. All that being said, I would be pretty damn fired up if I addressed something to an admin in a PM and it was made a public example out of. Given the context, I don't think it matters how many similar messages that admin gets about the issue. However one person believes is how they believe. As a forum administrator, one of the hardest parts of your job is that you have to find a diplomatic way to handle things like this. If you want more members to respect the culture of and diversity these forums are made of, a great place for that to start is from our moderators by respecting the privacy of PM's. I'm not trying to say Matthew is a bad moderator, I do not feel that way one bit. Quite the contrary. Matthew in fact responded after the fact, to my request to remove my unwanted post and he was very respectful. It was the first time I had ever asked a moderator/admin to do something like this on this forum. I am only bringing this up because Matthew talked about leading by example, which is a very important part of the point he was making. I dont think some of the followup was a very good example of how moderators/admins should behave with PMs directed to them. If the user wanted it to be public, they would have posted publicly. Given the context, it really makes no difference if a name was used or not. His first post was pointed, very well written, and I think received well by the members. It was diplomatic and respectful. Having been a forum admin before for a rather large forum, I totally relate to how flustered some peoples PM's can get.

my .02You have a good point that I never considered. I blew it. My (belated) apologies to the unnamed sender of the PM. It's probably too late for removing it to be of any value, but I will take this to heart in the future.

](*,) <-at myself for not thinking of this...I could have made something up that was similar, but not a direct quote, etc., and still made my point. I made a note for the future.

Tundro Walker
January 4th, 2008, 03:09 AM
I think a part of every forum, thread, reply, etc, someone is trying to impose some part of themselves onto others, and as long as it goes with the group mind-set of the forum, folks are ok with it. For instance, we get some folks on here passionately trying to convert folks over to using whatever Linux app they prefer using for whatever issue (EG: using Abi-word as your word-processor instead of Open Office Writer). But, when it goes beyond the scope of the forum, like someone pushing their religious, sexual, moral, etc beliefs onto others, that's really annoying.

Aside from the forum conduct rules, there's usually additional unspoken group consensus on what's considered moral behavior and lewd or immoral behavior. For instance, we try to abstain from harsh language. But folks occasionally slip it in. So what. It's just a part of life, and sometimes it helps emphasize something (as long as EVERYTHING isn't a swear word, because then everything loses emphasis).

But, I really pity the person who wigs out about someone using "foul language" (the dreaded "p" word in this case), because...

a) it means they're extremely sheltered and have never been around regular folks talking if they get wigged out about it so easily, and
b) it means they're self-centered ... they want everyone to conform to their standards
This whole Political Correctness and Vocal Minority crap is really getting out of hand.

Kzin
January 4th, 2008, 03:17 AM
+1
Regardless of the infringement on this user's privacy, if you don't like what you are reading, read somewhere else.
Darn, I've gone and given the troll a bone.

allforcarrie
January 5th, 2008, 05:38 AM
***

Tundro Walker
January 5th, 2008, 08:22 AM
Well, the person that got offended is entitled to their beliefs. And I sort of feel bad for bagging on them for speaking their mind. You don't want to berate them to the point of not speaking up in the future when they might actually have a valid complaint. It's just that they need to get some perspective on the issue. Or maybe they should have just approached it from a more neutral stance.

EG: from a public service stand-point, like...

"I think there's a person using language that's inappropriate to a forum that children and people at work view. Your forum didn't auto-censor it, so I'm not sure, but could you please look into it?"...it sounds like a reasonable request. But when they take the "world revolves around me / do as i say" stand-point...

"OMG! This person is using language that I PERSONALLY find OFFENSIVE and VULGAR! You're a mod so I DEMAND that you do something about it NOW!"...it sounds like they're blowing the issue out of proportion and telling someone how to do their job, which is completely rude.

Well, I hope whomever used that offensive "p" word (which the forum doesn't censor) was properly chewed out with a scathing IM or email before their IP was banned permanently from this and any other sites affiliated with Ubuntu. That's the proper thing to do after all. (Yes, I'm being sarcastic...)

lisati
January 5th, 2008, 08:34 AM
I've had a look at some of the earlier posts in this thread. Here are some thoughts:


We need a Firefox extension that filters out/replaces offending words for the easily offended (when loading websites, not when posting). The easily offended can install it, while the rest of us can use whichever words we want...

There are possibilities: The Linksys router I use has a filter that blocks out websites that contains words or reference of an administrators choice. I've heard of set-top boxes that use the closed caption system to "beep" out potentially offensive material. Perhaps something that combines both ideas might be possible.



What is "Christian bashing"? Please define it.
There is "christianity" and "christianity". Sometimes the loudest objectors to certain things are un-Christian and don't realise it.


"pissed off" offended someone? rofl. get a grip whoever you are. good luck in the real world.



Welcome to the Internet

Those easily offended or of a nervous disposition please look away now.

+100

matthew
January 5th, 2008, 11:13 AM
Or maybe they should have just approached it from a more neutral stance.

EG: from a public service stand-point, like...
"I think there's a person using language that's inappropriate to a forum that children and people at work view. Your forum didn't auto-censor it, so I'm not sure, but could you please look into it?"...it sounds like a reasonable request. But when they take the "world revolves around me / do as i say" stand-point...
"OMG! This person is using language that I PERSONALLY find OFFENSIVE and VULGAR! You're a mod so I DEMAND that you do something about it NOW!"...it sounds like they're blowing the issue out of proportion and telling someone how to do their job, which is completely rude.
That was a huge part of my main point. Thank you. You get it.

Bruce M.
January 5th, 2008, 11:36 PM
Just FYI, everyone. I have received a couple of really grumpy private messages from two specific users who were certain I was referring to them when I wrote the post. I wasn't, but in retrospect I could have been. One was quite angry and has vowed not to participate in the forums, except in the technical areas...I told him I thought that was a wise decision and he wasn't real happy with me.

Count me officially amused.

On that note, I am going to get some sleep now.

:lolflag: matthew, are you absolutely sure what that "P-word" was?

I'm thinking that it has to be: Paranoid, and to the power of 2 no less.

And I'm certain you had a peaceful sleep as well.
Bruce

PS: Great Post - Thread, I agree with you.

drewster1829
January 6th, 2008, 12:07 AM
I'm so tired of people not accepting my beliefs as their own, and constantly offending me by disagreeing with my obviously always correct viewpoint! :roll:

I would therefore like to impose the belief that others shouldn't impose their beliefs on others (excluding this one), ever.

IMHO, those who offend are not the ones in the wrong -- the ones who take offense are. If no one would ever take offense to anything, no one could offend anyone else, and we could all hold hands and sing Kumbuya.

Matthew, you're totally in the right, and you have one of the most difficult jobs out there. Great job, and thanks. =D>

Bruce M.
January 6th, 2008, 12:15 AM
So insteed we should say somethign like #@#$@%@%$#@^$Windows&$%*$#%^^@%&$&$#%^HDD%%@%^@%^$@%^@^Ubuntu!@$#%#@%@?

Oh, oh, OH! Can I please translate this?

PLEASE!

Good, no one said: NO! So there is only one other answer: Yes!

OK, here goes:

asjdfwejqrfjcvm msz34rq33;3889986 is logging into the Ubuntu Forums.

Translation: "And I had such an easy Windows user name. Nope, HDD isn't it, now just what the heck is my Ubuntu user name?"

Of course I cleaned up the language so as not to offend anyone. :lolflag:

No offence meant asjdfwejqrfjcvm msz34rq33;3889986, but it was just too good to pass up.

{ducking and dodging the tomatoes}

Bruce

red_five
January 6th, 2008, 08:45 PM
@maniacmusician #26:

My only real problem with The Golden Compass is it isn't original. It's just an atheist knock-off of The Chronicles of Narnia.

As a Christian myself, I can't believe that the Westboro...people call themselves Christian. They are the clearest example of the stereotypical religious bigot today, which is extra-sad because many people paint the rest of us Christians with that same brush. For what it's worth, I denounce them and their actions as a non-Christian personality cult.

I agree that in America, at least (can't speak of other countries where I have never visited), we have become too sensitive to certain things. I think somewhere in the 50s or 60s, a government experiment or program removed the "thick skin" gene from our DNA. This action disabled the "common courtesy" and "common sense" genes. Bastards.

As to the original topic, I have only to say: :KS:KS:KS:KS

maniacmusician
January 6th, 2008, 10:41 PM
@maniacmusician #26:

My only real problem with The Golden Compass is it isn't original. It's just an atheist knock-off of The Chronicles of Narnia.

As a Christian myself, I can't believe that the Westboro...people call themselves Christian. They are the clearest example of the stereotypical religious bigot today, which is extra-sad because many people paint the rest of us Christians with that same brush. For what it's worth, I denounce them and their actions as a non-Christian personality cult.

I agree that in America, at least (can't speak of other countries where I have never visited), we have become too sensitive to certain things. I think somewhere in the 50s or 60s, a government experiment or program removed the "thick skin" gene from our DNA. This action disabled the "common courtesy" and "common sense" genes. Bastards.

As to the original topic, I have only to say: :KS:KS:KS:KS
Well, I haven't seen The Golden Compass, nor do I feel compelled to do so, but from what my friend told me, there weren't any supremely evident atheist themes in the movie, and certainly not any that would warrant it getting banned by the Catholic church. I just think its a little ridiculous that they can even do that. They could condemn it, sure, as long as they say "The views of the Church don't reflect the views of all of our members.

But slapping a ban on it, and saying that kids shouldn't watch it is too ridiculous for me to bear. I think a religion is an extremely personal thing that changes, however slightly or grandly, from indvidual to individual, and banning kids from consuming certain media is akin to brainwashing. I feel that people should experience the world and their surroundings fully and let their experiences and insights mold their personal religion. We shouldn't be force-feeding religion to children.

As for the rest of your post, I couldn't agree more. I certainly know that all Christian folk are not as extremely disgusting as WBC. Religion was supposed to be a way to help people embrace their life, loved ones, and death...why should it be discriminating against certain people falling in love with each other?

I wish more people would put "being a decent human being" on top of their priority lists and new year's resolutions.

PS: I was mainly talking about the movie Golden Compass...I have heard that the book did have some more overriding atheist themes...but even so, my scecond paragraph still holds.

PPS: The Chronicles of Narnia was such a great series. I need to dig those up again.

ubunterooster
March 25th, 2010, 04:14 AM
I suppose many would consider me one of the overly strict Christians.
I can handle any bad language with the exception of irreligious uses of h※LL and D※mn and names of God used as common exclamations. These words have there place but while I dislike others using them, I undestand that the CoC forbids me from doing much more than discouraging it by editing those posts in replies or responding as if the word was not there.
I know my place and do my best to keep in line, even when disagreeing.

Sef
March 25th, 2010, 04:39 AM
Necromancing. This antepenultimate post had been posted over 2 ago, when the penultimate post was posted. This is the ultimate post.