Putting an end to things (52)
White Noise. . Dark Noise? . . water dripping.. Window squeaking.,
Others opinions .
Others opinions .
------ This thread is Archived ------
Kaylana04: How can we put an end to the bickering and back-biting that has ravaged the forums?
Deep breath, Everyone!
What is the fighting really about? Why are people adamantly defending their position?
At the risk of being "patronizing"...(sigh)... here are just a few observations... I'm open for other's viewpoints on how to solve the bickering.
The one side, who is shouting about the definition of Islam, is really, honestly, shouting about their concern for their own protection and their right to defend themselves against a "perceived" enemy.
The opposing side is shouting the need for "Love" and acceptance. (This is the extension of the term.)
The first side declares the opposition as colluding with the enemy... and thus groups them together - when indeed, it could be far from the truth.
The extension side values inclusion, thus seeing the other side as being wrong and hateful in their exclusion- when that, too, could be far from the truth.
So, the arguments are really about the right (and necessity) to protect oneself and the belief that all humanity should be loved.
Now, I am certain that both sides would probably agree that the opposing side is valid - the side declaring "love" would agree that one should protect themselves, and the protectionists would agree everyone should be loving and accepting of all humanity, regardless of the ideologies espoused.
Make sense??? Anyone???
The best way to end in a forum, especially a forum to which logic is far from the argument, is for people to quite simply walk awayDeep breath, Everyone!
What is the fighting really about? Why are people adamantly defending their position?
At the risk of being "patronizing"...(sigh)... here are just a few observations... I'm open for other's viewpoints on how to solve the bickering.
The one side, who is shouting about the definition of Islam, is really, honestly, shouting about their concern for their own protection and their right to defend themselves against a "perceived" enemy.
The opposing side is shouting the need for "Love" and acceptance. (This is the extension of the term.)
The first side declares the opposition as colluding with the enemy... and thus groups them together - when indeed, it could be far from the truth.
The extension side values inclusion, thus seeing the other side as being wrong and hateful in their exclusion- when that, too, could be far from the truth.
So, the arguments are really about the right (and necessity) to protect oneself and the belief that all humanity should be loved.
Now, I am certain that both sides would probably agree that the opposing side is valid - the side declaring "love" would agree that one should protect themselves, and the protectionists would agree everyone should be loving and accepting of all humanity, regardless of the ideologies espoused.
Make sense??? Anyone???
It is impossible to debate or even discuss with a closed minded audience.
One of the side effects of extremism.
Some people only see/hear/think what they want to see/hear/think
------ This thread is Archived ------
rizlared: The best way to end in a forum, especially a forum to which logic is far from the argument, is for people to quite simply walk away
It is impossible to debate or even discuss with a closed minded audience.
One of the side effects of extremism.
Some people only see/hear/think what they want to see/hear/think
Thanks Riz,It is impossible to debate or even discuss with a closed minded audience.
One of the side effects of extremism.
Some people only see/hear/think what they want to see/hear/think
Yes, this is an option.
A sign of intelligence is the ability to see plurality and division...
John was right in stating that the good people are disappearing. So, how does one defend the location (forums) without walking away?
------ This thread is Archived ------
Pistols at dawn.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Kaylana04: How can we put an end to the bickering and back-biting that has ravaged the forums?
Deep breath, Everyone!
What is the fighting really about? Why are people adamantly defending their position?
At the risk of being "patronizing"...(sigh)... here are just a few observations... I'm open for other's viewpoints on how to solve the bickering.
The one side, who is shouting about the definition of Islam, is really, honestly, shouting about their concern for their own protection and their right to defend themselves against a "perceived" enemy.
The opposing side is shouting the need for "Love" and acceptance. (This is the extension of the term.)
The first side declares the opposition as colluding with the enemy... and thus groups them together - when indeed, it could be far from the truth.
The extension side values inclusion, thus seeing the other side as being wrong and hateful in their exclusion- when that, too, could be far from the truth.
So, the arguments are really about the right (and necessity) to protect oneself and the belief that all humanity should be loved.
Now, I am certain that both sides would probably agree that the opposing side is valid - the side declaring "love" would agree that one should protect themselves, and the protectionists would agree everyone should be loving and accepting of all humanity, regardless of the ideologies espoused.
Make sense??? Anyone???
IMHO, There is a very easy way to avoid most negativity in the forums. Simply stop defining discussions by country an instead have CS replace the forums by Country (international, USA, uk, Ireland etc) with Forums by Subject area. (chat threads, religious, jokes, food etc.) Deep breath, Everyone!
What is the fighting really about? Why are people adamantly defending their position?
At the risk of being "patronizing"...(sigh)... here are just a few observations... I'm open for other's viewpoints on how to solve the bickering.
The one side, who is shouting about the definition of Islam, is really, honestly, shouting about their concern for their own protection and their right to defend themselves against a "perceived" enemy.
The opposing side is shouting the need for "Love" and acceptance. (This is the extension of the term.)
The first side declares the opposition as colluding with the enemy... and thus groups them together - when indeed, it could be far from the truth.
The extension side values inclusion, thus seeing the other side as being wrong and hateful in their exclusion- when that, too, could be far from the truth.
So, the arguments are really about the right (and necessity) to protect oneself and the belief that all humanity should be loved.
Now, I am certain that both sides would probably agree that the opposing side is valid - the side declaring "love" would agree that one should protect themselves, and the protectionists would agree everyone should be loving and accepting of all humanity, regardless of the ideologies espoused.
Make sense??? Anyone???
So, example, someone creates a thread or posts a religious joke in the food area, then the mods can justifiably easily delete it. If some talks politics w/o a religious undertone in the religious forum then bada-bing the thread or post is auto-deleted.
What do I know.
hey kaylana------ This thread is Archived ------
galrads: IMHO, There is a very easy way to avoid most negativity in the forums. Simply stop defining discussions by country an instead have CS replace the forums by Country (international, USA, uk, Ireland etc) with Forums by Subject area. (chat threads, religious, jokes, food etc.)
Hey Gal!I think this option would help sequester the bickering into a corner, at least. I'm not sure if it would stop it though.
But if it were taking place in a corner and not on the main screen, it would be easier to ignore... maybe...
Thanks for the input!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Agree to disagree....nobody is gonna change anybody's mind and one having an opinion has no effect on the others life at all....its an opinion....everyone has one and is entitled to it whether its the same as ours or not.....it is what it is....so accept what is and except that people are different and will have differing opinions on things..... 
Nobody can make that happen either....this is just my suggestion.....
Nobody can make that happen either....this is just my suggestion.....
------ This thread is Archived ------
M4_Mischief: Agree to disagree....nobody is gonna change anybody's mind and one having an opinion has no effect on the others life at all....its an opinion....everyone has one and is entitled to it whether its the same as ours or not.....it is what it is....so accept what is and except that people are different and will have differing opinions on things.....
Nobody can make that happen either....this is just my suggestion.....
Thank M4,Nobody can make that happen either....this is just my suggestion.....
I agree that sometimes there can be no conclusion other than to acknowledge our differing beliefs and opinions.
I hope that people can see that what they are arguing about is two completely different issues: right to protect and the necessity to love and accept all humanity.
I think you wrote about emotions on my other thread. It is best to keep emotions out of discussions. Emotions cloud our judgment - no matter what the subject matter.
Cheers!!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Kaylana04: How can we put an end to the bickering and back-biting that has ravaged the forums?
Deep breath, Everyone!
What is the fighting really about? Why are people adamantly defending their position?
At the risk of being "patronizing"...(sigh)... here are just a few observations... I'm open for other's viewpoints on how to solve the bickering.
The one side, who is shouting about the definition of Islam, is really, honestly, shouting about their concern for their own protection and their right to defend themselves against a "perceived" enemy.
The opposing side is shouting the need for "Love" and acceptance. (This is the extension of the term.)
The first side declares the opposition as colluding with the enemy... and thus groups them together - when indeed, it could be far from the truth.
The extension side values inclusion, thus seeing the other side as being wrong and hateful in their exclusion- when that, too, could be far from the truth.
So, the arguments are really about the right (and necessity) to protect oneself and the belief that all humanity should be loved.
Now, I am certain that both sides would probably agree that the opposing side is valid - the side declaring "love" would agree that one should protect themselves, and the protectionists would agree everyone should be loving and accepting of all humanity, regardless of the ideologies espoused.
Make sense??? Anyone???
Muslims, hatered on Muslims that's what it's about. The more you stand up about it. The more people hate on you for seeing injustice. Deep breath, Everyone!
What is the fighting really about? Why are people adamantly defending their position?
At the risk of being "patronizing"...(sigh)... here are just a few observations... I'm open for other's viewpoints on how to solve the bickering.
The one side, who is shouting about the definition of Islam, is really, honestly, shouting about their concern for their own protection and their right to defend themselves against a "perceived" enemy.
The opposing side is shouting the need for "Love" and acceptance. (This is the extension of the term.)
The first side declares the opposition as colluding with the enemy... and thus groups them together - when indeed, it could be far from the truth.
The extension side values inclusion, thus seeing the other side as being wrong and hateful in their exclusion- when that, too, could be far from the truth.
So, the arguments are really about the right (and necessity) to protect oneself and the belief that all humanity should be loved.
Now, I am certain that both sides would probably agree that the opposing side is valid - the side declaring "love" would agree that one should protect themselves, and the protectionists would agree everyone should be loving and accepting of all humanity, regardless of the ideologies espoused.
Make sense??? Anyone???
It's an ideology that people can stop spreading hate on here. What are they meant to do? Allow others in this forum to feel oppressed. Unable to speak due to their faith? Spoken to rudely, offensively and mocked.
No both sides do not agree the other has valid points. One side continually, willfully treats one group of people the same.
We'll just ignore it eh?
------ This thread is Archived ------
deviant_slice: Pistols at dawn.
You sir have insulted me, I demand satisfaction.
------ This thread is Archived ------
There has been bickering and fighting on the forums and blogs since they opened. And it isn't going to change, no matter what anybody does.
That may sound negative, but it is just a fact.
When the mods made the last changes, they said they would confine the politics/religion to a separate section and not let it disturb the main forum page, but that only seemed to last a few days.
If it were properly boxed-off, people who enjoy the subject matter, and for that matter, the arguing, could continue to their heart's content, and not annoy the rest of the members with it.
That may sound negative, but it is just a fact.
When the mods made the last changes, they said they would confine the politics/religion to a separate section and not let it disturb the main forum page, but that only seemed to last a few days.
If it were properly boxed-off, people who enjoy the subject matter, and for that matter, the arguing, could continue to their heart's content, and not annoy the rest of the members with it.
------ This thread is Archived ------
mollybaby: There has been bickering and fighting on the forums and blogs since they opened. And it isn't going to change, no matter what anybody does.
That may sound negative, but it is just a fact.
When the mods made the last changes, they said they would confine the politics/religion to a separate section and not let it disturb the main forum page, but that only seemed to last a few days.
If it were properly boxed-off, people who enjoy the subject matter, and for that matter, the arguing, could continue to their heart's content, and not annoy the rest of the members with it.
Are you sure you posted to the right ForumThat may sound negative, but it is just a fact.
When the mods made the last changes, they said they would confine the politics/religion to a separate section and not let it disturb the main forum page, but that only seemed to last a few days.
If it were properly boxed-off, people who enjoy the subject matter, and for that matter, the arguing, could continue to their heart's content, and not annoy the rest of the members with it.
Cause that is the best reply ever
------ This thread is Archived ------
rizlared: Are you sure you posted to the right Forum
Cause that is the best reply ever
It'll probably get deleted so Cause that is the best reply ever
------ This thread is Archived ------
snowlynx: You sir have insulted me, I demand satisfaction.
Haha!!Hi Snowlynx! Thanks for stopping by!
I hope your honor is still intact.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Kaylana04: How can we put an end to the bickering and back-biting that has ravaged the forums?
Deep breath, Everyone!
What is the fighting really about? Why are people adamantly defending their position?
At the risk of being "patronizing"...(sigh)... here are just a few observations... I'm open for other's viewpoints on how to solve the bickering.
The one side, who is shouting about the definition of Islam, is really, honestly, shouting about their concern for their own protection and their right to defend themselves against a "perceived" enemy.
The opposing side is shouting the need for "Love" and acceptance. (This is the extension of the term.)
The first side declares the opposition as colluding with the enemy... and thus groups them together - when indeed, it could be far from the truth.
The extension side values inclusion, thus seeing the other side as being wrong and hateful in their exclusion- when that, too, could be far from the truth.
So, the arguments are really about the right (and necessity) to protect oneself and the belief that all humanity should be loved.
Now, I am certain that both sides would probably agree that the opposing side is valid - the side declaring "love" would agree that one should protect themselves, and the protectionists would agree everyone should be loving and accepting of all humanity, regardless of the ideologies espoused.
Make sense??? Anyone???
It's no one's job to 'solve the bickering' Deep breath, Everyone!
What is the fighting really about? Why are people adamantly defending their position?
At the risk of being "patronizing"...(sigh)... here are just a few observations... I'm open for other's viewpoints on how to solve the bickering.
The one side, who is shouting about the definition of Islam, is really, honestly, shouting about their concern for their own protection and their right to defend themselves against a "perceived" enemy.
The opposing side is shouting the need for "Love" and acceptance. (This is the extension of the term.)
The first side declares the opposition as colluding with the enemy... and thus groups them together - when indeed, it could be far from the truth.
The extension side values inclusion, thus seeing the other side as being wrong and hateful in their exclusion- when that, too, could be far from the truth.
So, the arguments are really about the right (and necessity) to protect oneself and the belief that all humanity should be loved.
Now, I am certain that both sides would probably agree that the opposing side is valid - the side declaring "love" would agree that one should protect themselves, and the protectionists would agree everyone should be loving and accepting of all humanity, regardless of the ideologies espoused.
Make sense??? Anyone???
Your post is a no-brainer for many on here I imagine, but that doesn't equate to denying people's right to their opinions and beliefs nor the right to stand up for them
------ This thread is Archived ------
Kaylana04: How can we put an end to the bickering and back-biting that has ravaged the forums?
Deep breath, Everyone!
What is the fighting really about? Why are people adamantly defending their position?
At the risk of being "patronizing"...(sigh)... here are just a few observations... I'm open for other's viewpoints on how to solve the bickering.
The one side, who is shouting about the definition of Islam, is really, honestly, shouting about their concern for their own protection and their right to defend themselves against a "perceived" enemy.
The opposing side is shouting the need for "Love" and acceptance. (This is the extension of the term.)
The first side declares the opposition as colluding with the enemy... and thus groups them together - when indeed, it could be far from the truth.
The extension side values inclusion, thus seeing the other side as being wrong and hateful in their exclusion- when that, too, could be far from the truth.
So, the arguments are really about the right (and necessity) to protect oneself and the belief that all humanity should be loved.
Now, I am certain that both sides would probably agree that the opposing side is valid - the side declaring "love" would agree that one should protect themselves, and the protectionists would agree everyone should be loving and accepting of all humanity, regardless of the ideologies espoused.
Make sense??? Anyone???
You don’t often encounter a right wing herb. The kind of naive that is the butt of everyone’s jokes but never loses enthusiasm being oblivious to the joke. Deep breath, Everyone!
What is the fighting really about? Why are people adamantly defending their position?
At the risk of being "patronizing"...(sigh)... here are just a few observations... I'm open for other's viewpoints on how to solve the bickering.
The one side, who is shouting about the definition of Islam, is really, honestly, shouting about their concern for their own protection and their right to defend themselves against a "perceived" enemy.
The opposing side is shouting the need for "Love" and acceptance. (This is the extension of the term.)
The first side declares the opposition as colluding with the enemy... and thus groups them together - when indeed, it could be far from the truth.
The extension side values inclusion, thus seeing the other side as being wrong and hateful in their exclusion- when that, too, could be far from the truth.
So, the arguments are really about the right (and necessity) to protect oneself and the belief that all humanity should be loved.
Now, I am certain that both sides would probably agree that the opposing side is valid - the side declaring "love" would agree that one should protect themselves, and the protectionists would agree everyone should be loving and accepting of all humanity, regardless of the ideologies espoused.
Make sense??? Anyone???
And you don’t often encounter a left-wing paranoid whack job. The kind of paranoid that is terrified of the outside world even though it knows nothing about it.
------ This thread is Archived ------
mollybaby: There has been bickering and fighting on the forums and blogs since they opened. And it isn't going to change, no matter what anybody does.
..,
If it were properly boxed-off, people who enjoy the subject matter, and for that matter, the arguing, could continue to their heart's content, and not annoy the rest of the members with it.
Hi Molly!..,
If it were properly boxed-off, people who enjoy the subject matter, and for that matter, the arguing, could continue to their heart's content, and not annoy the rest of the members with it.
You are probably quite right... it may never go away..
I am left wondering where the true gentlemen and ladies are who can carry on a civilized debate that doesn’t resort to name calling and petty accusations.
(Ps. You have quite the fan base. A lady of your repute is one I’d like to invite over for a discussion over a cup of coffee.)
Cheers!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Kaylana04: Haha!!
Hi Snowlynx! Thanks for stopping by!
I hope your honor is still intact.
No, it has been shattered. I won't stand for it I tell you, I won't stand for it....I will redeem it, death before dishonour!Hi Snowlynx! Thanks for stopping by!
I hope your honor is still intact.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Kaylana04: Hi Molly!
You are probably quite right... it may never go away..
I am left wondering where the true gentlemen and ladies are who can carry on a civilized debate that doesn’t resort to name calling and petty accusations.
(Ps. You have quite the fan base. A lady of your repute is one I’d like to invite over for a discussion over a cup of coffee.)
Cheers!
Believe me, I have plenty of detractors too You are probably quite right... it may never go away..
I am left wondering where the true gentlemen and ladies are who can carry on a civilized debate that doesn’t resort to name calling and petty accusations.
(Ps. You have quite the fan base. A lady of your repute is one I’d like to invite over for a discussion over a cup of coffee.)
Cheers!
I can deal with it though
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
The weird and the random facts around the world
Are the ads on here as phony as some of the profiles?
The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
who shaped your life?
What happened to CS while i was away.. (Long time)
I'm a 53 YEAR'S YUNG MAN that lives back in the 80s
Have it both ways!
biggest lie
Would you hire this guy - for any job?
Who will be The Last Person To Post... VERSION FOUR
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Stats for this Thread
2,187 Views
51 Comments
in Advice
Created: Jun 2018
Last Viewed: Apr 21
Last Commented: Jun 2018
11 Likes
Last Liked: Jun 2018
4 DisAgrees
Last DisAgreed: Jun 2018
Related Forums
- The weird and the random facts around the world
- Are the ads on here as phony as some of the profiles?
- The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
- who shaped your life?
- What happened to CS while i was away.. (Long time)
- I'm a 53 YEAR'S YUNG MAN that lives back in the 80s
- Have it both ways!
- biggest lie
- Would you hire this guy - for any job?
- Who will be The Last Person To Post... VERSION FOUR
Deep breath, Everyone!
What is the fighting really about? Why are people adamantly defending their position?
At the risk of being "patronizing"...(sigh)... here are just a few observations... I'm open for other's viewpoints on how to solve the bickering.
The one side, who is shouting about the definition of Islam, is really, honestly, shouting about their concern for their own protection and their right to defend themselves against a "perceived" enemy.
The opposing side is shouting the need for "Love" and acceptance. (This is the extension of the term.)
The first side declares the opposition as colluding with the enemy... and thus groups them together - when indeed, it could be far from the truth.
The extension side values inclusion, thus seeing the other side as being wrong and hateful in their exclusion- when that, too, could be far from the truth.
So, the arguments are really about the right (and necessity) to protect oneself and the belief that all humanity should be loved.
Now, I am certain that both sides would probably agree that the opposing side is valid - the side declaring "love" would agree that one should protect themselves, and the protectionists would agree everyone should be loving and accepting of all humanity, regardless of the ideologies espoused.
Make sense??? Anyone???