Autor Tópico: A wannabe forum constitution  (Lida 1820 vezes)

0 Membros e 1 Visitante estão vendo este tópico.

Offline Fenrir

  • Nível 26
  • *
  • Mensagens: 1.265
  • Sexo: Masculino
A wannabe forum constitution
« Online: 25 de Julho de 2008, 01:26:49 »
Pessoal,

Estava eu imaginando como seria uma "constituicao" de um forum ou comunidade hipoteticos
e internacionais (uso ou nao uso plural aqui? isto é coisa pro Àpate responder).
Se tiverem paciencia de ler e entenderem meu inglês falcônico, por favor critiquem, enviem
sugestoes, xinguem, elogiem, etc.

First of all,
   "<<thing>>" is a placeholder for "thing"
   "philosophy" is to "subject" as "philosopher" is to "subjector"(sic)

ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS TEXT AND OUR "POLITICAL" REGIME

Note that we are not in an anarchy, nor in a lenient, over-permissible democracy, so please
pay attention to the rules cointained in the paragraphs below and enter only and only if you aggree
with them all.

Think about this community as a foreign country in which you should obey it's laws in order
to enter and to mix with it's people and culture in a friendly, reasonable way.

ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF THE HYPOTHETICAL COMMUNITY

The purpose of this community is to dialog, to criticise, to analyse, to teach and to learn
about <<the_subject>>, it's history and it's <<subjectors>> in a serious way.
This way will become clearer as you continue reading this text.

ABOUT THE COMMUNITY-SPECIFIC RULES AND MEMBER BEHAVIOUR

You must use a valid and a real e-mail that must be visible to all members of the community.
We do not think about any good reason to hide it from the other members.

Multiple accounts are not allowed. One account is enough.

The main subject of this community is <<the_subject>>, so off-topic posts are not permitted
on the main area.
If you want to relax and talk about anything other than <<the_subject>>, then use the appropriate
community area for that or send private messages or an e-mail to any of us.

One could argue: what if I would like to talk about a ferrari? If you want to talk about
it's technical features, trivia, and it's potential to attract a beautiful, but gasoline-addicted
jane doe, please do that in the proper area, that is not the main area, unless the "subject"
in <<subject>> is "ways to attract the most beautiful women" or "everything you want to know about ferrari".

On the other hand, if you want to use the ferrari in an argument or idea that you have and
that is under the dominion of the <<the_subject>>, even if a Ferrari does not appear, at a first
thought, to have anything to do with <<the_subject>>, it's everything OK, just shows us your
ideas.
For example, if <<the_subject>> was philosophy, I would suggest you that we could examine
why a Ferrari is or appear to be so desirable for so many... does it have anything to do with
aesthetics or does it not have? For example, while one could argue that status have nothing in common
with aesthetics, another one could say or propose that any kind of status could be studied applying
some ideas and theory of aestetics, since aestetics seems to be related to what any one who desires status
consider as being desirable to give him status, that is what appears beautiful to that one and what that one thinks appear equaly beautiful to others, then possible of being a subject of one's aesthetic appreciation and judgement.

(Fenrir prefers lamborghinis, has a far more cheaper car and is married to a woman that is not a gasoline-addicted jane doe!)

Accounts of users who are no longer active for a long, long while will "expire" (we will search and
delete them periodicaly).
Nothing strange here, as good sense warns us that, among other reasons, such users really don't have
time to spare with us!

Please do not press or ask any of us to answer your postings faster or to answer them at all.
Like you, we have many other daily tasks and obligations to do. It's not our job nor our duty
to answer you or do that in any way you think we shoud do (we mean besides what is stated in
this text)!

Flooding, Spamming and Trolling is not allowed in the main area, regardless any reason
you could think about.
The punition is the baniment and deletion of all related then unwanted material.

The only excuse for a troll or a spammer do what they do is if that fake and part-time (we hope)
troll or spammer do his spamming and trolling in an humorous, acceptable or aggreeable way
and outside the main area of the community.
We are not statues devoid of any humor nor infalible saints, but do not think that we are unable
to recognize the difference of, e.g., someone pretending to being a troll because he wants to play
or tell a joke and someone who are being a troll attacking and annoying our members.
The last case has no excuse even outside the main area and even pretending to be doing in a
humorous way! To say that in other words, the troll and it's trollable public must be in aggreement
about the trolling.

As regards flooding, please avoid it or we will be overwhelmed with more material that we are
capable to deal properly!

ABOUT THE LANGUAGE OR LANGUAGES OF THIS COMMUNITY.

Since English is the de facto internet language, we adopted it as the language of this community,
so posting in another languages must be avoided.

If your english is bad, you can still post here and be welcomed (my english is not good
and that has not prevented me to talk in an understantable way with english-speaking persons).

If you really do not know anything about English but would like to discuss, you can always
ask for help or use an online tool such as Altavista Babelfish before posting.
Be pro-active.

The only non-english text if will see here are <<examples_of_languages>> versions of
this text.

Why that? Obviously because we would like to know what the people of other nations/cultures
would like to say about <<the_subject>>, and not only our neighbours!

This being so, there is no reasonable reason that english should not be the only adopted
language!

ABOUT UNWARRANTED PERSONS, BEHAVIOURS AND IDEAS

Analogous to the case of trolling and the like, the commendments bellow must be obeyed,
or we will send you to hell ;-) :

1 Thou shalt not think that <<the_subject>> is like <<obvious_examples_of_non_subjects>>.

2 Conversely, thou shalt no think that <<obvious_examples_of_non_subjects>> are like <<the_subject>>.

3 Thou shalt not think that persons like <<obvious_examples_of_non_subjectors>> are/were <<subjectors>>.

4 Conversely, thou shalt not think that <<a_subjector>> is/was <<obvious_examples_of_non_subjectors>>.

5 Thou shalt not do <<obvious_examples_of_acceptable_behaviour>>.

6 Thou shalt not art or think you art <<obvious_examples_of_unwanted_kind_of_persons>>.

7 Thou shalt not use and abuse of fallacies, ilogical reasoning, nonsense, etc.

8 Thou shalt not think that the entirety of <<the_subject>> IS ONLY AND ONLY what YOU or what a
specific <<subjector>> wrote, said, did or thought. To be a specialyst is not the same as
to be a narrow-minded apologist or follower.

This community is not a mess nor a trash can, amen!

ABOUT MEMBER CLAIMS AND COMPLAINS AGAINST THE COMMUNITY RULES AND THE
IPLICIT CONTRACT (THIS TEXT) BETWEEN HIM AND US

Please remember that, once having entered on this community, we will consider that you read, reflected
and accepted all the rules above, so any complain about them will be ignored and if persistent,
the complainer will be banned and his/her complaining verbosity erased.

ABOUT OUR DEFENSE AGAINST POSSIBLE CRITICISM AND THE REASONS WE HAVE ADOPTED AND
ACCEPTED WHAT YOU CAN READ HERE

No, we are not behaving as megalomanous dictators or evil tyrants! We are asking only that you must be consistent and honest with yourself ( i.e. with your previous aggreement in entering here ) and with all of us.
Please read Plato's Crito and you will understand why: the way we see these rules are similar to the way Socrates saw the laws of Athens. You have always, always the right to dissent of all this ideas and to search
for another place that have more in common with you, but on the other side, you have not any right to impose your ideas or points of view in this place, just as we do not have any rights to impose our rules in your own house!

You could think that this rules are too many/too rigid. To us ,it really seems not to be so:
they were inspired when the creator of this forum was thinking in the many troubles he and other creators, moderators and users have had in their forums, groups, clubs and communities throughout the web.

Again, if you do not aggree with any of these rules, you can still search for other communities that which
have more in common with you and your ideas. There are a plenty of them outside here and you really do not need this one, indeed!

ABOUT YOUR DESISTENCE AND ITS CONSEQUENCES

Once a member and if you have changed your mind, you may left the community at any time you wish:
you aren't in a dictatorial regime, in a ghetto or in a prison. As stated before, do not press us to do this
the way you think we must do (faster, etc). The request is yours but the "when" and the "how" we will attend it is ours (of course, as already stated, taking care to not disobey what is stated in this text).
Please consider that all information here is public and available freely (non-members could read anything).
For that reason, we will not delete any post you want to be deleted. We aggree that since the ideas are your property their exposition and debate are our property.

ABOUT SOME BENEFITS AND A LITTLE MORE ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF THIS COMMUNITY

The creator has the goal to do a better filtering of the material posted, as well as a better selection
as regards the users, in order to offer a good and interesting place and material to anyone who want to share his thoughts with us - That's our just retribution for what you have to offer.
For us quality is more important than quantity.

Of course, that does not mean that as a member you have to assent with all that the creator/moderators or the other members say ou have said. Since you do not disobey the rules described here, you can disagree, argue refute and discuss about anything you wish. And believe us, with or without this rules, there are much more than enough to be discussed about <<the_subject>> because <<good_reason_examples>>.

We are like neuronal circuits in a collective brain! If we do not function in harmony, the brain-community
will become mad or sick, oh my!

ABOUT ANY DOUBTS YOU MAY HAVE ABOUT THIS TEXT

Finally, Google is your friend! it can help you to know some unfamiliar terminology, persons, etc of this text. Feel free to write to me, if you want to ask something you cannot find with google.

OUR WELCOME MESSAGE

Finally, be welcome and let's do <<what_the_subjectors_do>>!

Fenrir, o insone.
"Heaven and Earth are not benevolent;
They treat the myriad of creatures as straw dogs"
Laozi

"no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavors to establish"
David Hume

Offline Fenrir

  • Nível 26
  • *
  • Mensagens: 1.265
  • Sexo: Masculino
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #1 Online: 03 de Agosto de 2008, 10:05:02 »
No opinions. Anyone?

Even one like
  'Fenrir, your text is a bunch of bullshit and nonsense' ?
 or
 'Please write less next time, try to write without so many errors  :enjoo: or don't write in English at all - limit yourself to write in Portuguese only'

"Heaven and Earth are not benevolent;
They treat the myriad of creatures as straw dogs"
Laozi

"no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavors to establish"
David Hume

Offline Moro

  • Nível Máximo
  • *
  • Mensagens: 20.984
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #2 Online: 03 de Agosto de 2008, 17:58:21 »
Fenrir

We have already talked about the role that CC could play in the brazilian skeptical scenario. We do not have any common view until now. Maybe to imagine that we could play a role in the world skeptical scenario would be a bigger step that none of us could even imagine.

Once I thought that CC should have some internal groups to argue in some debates (History, Philosofy, Physics, Evolution theory), aiming a final text that could be shared to the community. But this is difficult too, as the most of us work the whole day.
“If an ideology is peaceful, we will see its extremists and literalists as the most peaceful people on earth, that's called common sense.”

Faisal Saeed Al Mutar


"To claim that someone is not motivated by what they say is motivating them, means you know what motivates them better than they do."

Peter Boghossian

Sacred cows make the best hamburgers

I'm not convinced that faith can move mountains, but I've seen what it can do to skyscrapers."  --William Gascoyne

Offline Luis Dantas

  • Nível Máximo
  • *
  • Mensagens: 15.195
  • Sexo: Masculino
  • Morituri Delendi
    • DantasWiki
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #3 Online: 03 de Agosto de 2008, 18:05:37 »
I may be mistaken, but I think Fenrir isn't actually making a proposal about Clube Cético.
Wiki experimental | http://luisdantas.zip.net
The stanza uttered by a teacher is reborn in the scholar who repeats the word

Em 18 de janeiro de 2010, ainda não vejo motivo para postar aqui. Estou nos fóruns Ateus do Brasil, Realidade, RV.  Se a Moderação reconquistar meu respeito, eu volto.  Questão de coerência.

Offline Fenrir

  • Nível 26
  • *
  • Mensagens: 1.265
  • Sexo: Masculino
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #4 Online: 03 de Agosto de 2008, 18:31:13 »
I may be mistaken, but I think Fenrir isn't actually making a proposal about Clube Cético.

Yes, you are not mistaken.
My intention is not to make any constitution proposal to CC.
This text is only an exercise in both English and argumentation/presentation of ideas.

I'd like to emphasize once more: The post and it's constitution does not have anything to do with CC or any other forum constitutions (e.g. RV or Realidade), nor does it constitute or contains any proposal/suggestions/criticism as regards the forum/communities I mentioned.

When I was writing the text, I was thinking in a constitution for a fictional community possibly devoted to philosophy and how to keep it's contents as useful, interesting and serious as possible for anyone who loves philosophy, that's all.
« Última modificação: 04 de Agosto de 2008, 09:02:47 por Fenrir »
"Heaven and Earth are not benevolent;
They treat the myriad of creatures as straw dogs"
Laozi

"no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavors to establish"
David Hume

Offline Fenrir

  • Nível 26
  • *
  • Mensagens: 1.265
  • Sexo: Masculino
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #5 Online: 03 de Agosto de 2008, 18:35:09 »
Fenrir

We have already talked about the role that CC could play in the brazilian skeptical scenario. We do not have any common view until now. Maybe to imagine that we could play a role in the world skeptical scenario would be a bigger step that none of us could even imagine.

Once I thought that CC should have some internal groups to argue in some debates (History, Philosofy, Physics, Evolution theory), aiming a final text that could be shared to the community. But this is difficult too, as the most of us work the whole day.

Because of that, I think it is a good idea to skip any part that does not have relation to the theme of the forum and to make a forum/community of only and only about the theme discussed (so, off-topic posts are not allowed). That could facilitate the control task, or could not?
"Heaven and Earth are not benevolent;
They treat the myriad of creatures as straw dogs"
Laozi

"no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavors to establish"
David Hume

Offline Fabulous

  • Nível Máximo
  • *
  • Mensagens: 6.425
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #6 Online: 21 de Agosto de 2008, 22:40:38 »
wannabe
MSN: fabulous3700@hotmail.com

Offline JUS EST ARS

  • Nível 32
  • *
  • Mensagens: 2.128
  • Sexo: Masculino
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #7 Online: 22 de Agosto de 2008, 00:13:43 »

Hi Fenrir,

A) Rules should always be a clear statement, and not examples.

Good rule:
1. Don't kill.

Bad rule:
You know everyone must live, so if you, like, put a knife on somebody's head, we will punish you.

Reason -&gt; In the good example, all forms of killing are not alowed. In the second example, somebody may think of a crazy way of killing, and because it's not close to the given example, may think it is allowed.


B) You should give each rule a proper number. It makes easier for anyone to ask information about it.

C) Make clear what are the penalties for those who violate your rules. A rule without punition is the same as no rule.

D) Create a title wich states exactly what you don't want people to do (User Obligations).

Regards,


Offline Eremita

  • Nível 38
  • *
  • Mensagens: 3.806
  • Sexo: Masculino
  • Ecce.
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #8 Online: 22 de Agosto de 2008, 03:42:47 »
E)You could include the "why" and "where" when possible. It can detect superfluous rules, as well rules likely to be missinterpreted.
Monoteísmo é a hidra de Lerna. Con Kolivas estava certo sobre o desktop. Prozac não deixa tudo melhor. Aquiles devia ter escolhido os dois destinos, juntos. Coração sentimental + mente cética = aflição. Sou responsável pelo que digo, não pela sua interpretação sobre o que digo.

Offline JUS EST ARS

  • Nível 32
  • *
  • Mensagens: 2.128
  • Sexo: Masculino
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #9 Online: 22 de Agosto de 2008, 11:33:22 »


No. Imagine this:

1. Don't kill, because if you do that the family of the person you killed will suffer a lot.

A person look at the subject and see he has no family. He thinks: "since he has no family, I can kill hilm!".

Only clear statements, no "why".


Offline Eremita

  • Nível 38
  • *
  • Mensagens: 3.806
  • Sexo: Masculino
  • Ecce.
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #10 Online: 22 de Agosto de 2008, 18:02:53 »


No. Imagine this:

1. Don't kill, because if you do that the family of the person you killed will suffer a lot.

A person look at the subject and see he has no family. He thinks: "since he has no family, I can kill hilm!".

Only clear statements, no "why".
Ok, I got the point.

But... clear appointing the reasons for the rule allow discussion about it, and allows to see some situations where the rule is overruled by another.

I.e., there aren't some situations that killing is acceptable? Like, euthanasia, or self-defence? If so, the reason isn't only the family, right?
Monoteísmo é a hidra de Lerna. Con Kolivas estava certo sobre o desktop. Prozac não deixa tudo melhor. Aquiles devia ter escolhido os dois destinos, juntos. Coração sentimental + mente cética = aflição. Sou responsável pelo que digo, não pela sua interpretação sobre o que digo.

Offline JUS EST ARS

  • Nível 32
  • *
  • Mensagens: 2.128
  • Sexo: Masculino
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #11 Online: 22 de Agosto de 2008, 18:11:01 »


Yes, and the rule is like this:

1. Don't kill.

2. Killing is allowed when in self-defense.



Offline JUS EST ARS

  • Nível 32
  • *
  • Mensagens: 2.128
  • Sexo: Masculino
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #12 Online: 22 de Agosto de 2008, 22:58:40 »


In fact, this is better than the above:


1. Don't kill.
§1. Killing is allowed when in self-defense.



Offline Eremita

  • Nível 38
  • *
  • Mensagens: 3.806
  • Sexo: Masculino
  • Ecce.
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #13 Online: 23 de Agosto de 2008, 22:29:33 »
In fact, this is better than the above:


1. Don't kill.
§1. Killing is allowed when in self-defense.
Ok. I guess you're right. BTW, there must be discussion about the rules, always.
Monoteísmo é a hidra de Lerna. Con Kolivas estava certo sobre o desktop. Prozac não deixa tudo melhor. Aquiles devia ter escolhido os dois destinos, juntos. Coração sentimental + mente cética = aflição. Sou responsável pelo que digo, não pela sua interpretação sobre o que digo.

Offline Fabulous

  • Nível Máximo
  • *
  • Mensagens: 6.425
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #14 Online: 25 de Agosto de 2008, 00:44:30 »
Texas rules.
MSN: fabulous3700@hotmail.com

Offline Eremita

  • Nível 38
  • *
  • Mensagens: 3.806
  • Sexo: Masculino
  • Ecce.
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #15 Online: 25 de Agosto de 2008, 15:26:12 »
Monoteísmo é a hidra de Lerna. Con Kolivas estava certo sobre o desktop. Prozac não deixa tudo melhor. Aquiles devia ter escolhido os dois destinos, juntos. Coração sentimental + mente cética = aflição. Sou responsável pelo que digo, não pela sua interpretação sobre o que digo.

Offline JUS EST ARS

  • Nível 32
  • *
  • Mensagens: 2.128
  • Sexo: Masculino
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #16 Online: 25 de Agosto de 2008, 15:30:04 »

Offline Eremita

  • Nível 38
  • *
  • Mensagens: 3.806
  • Sexo: Masculino
  • Ecce.
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #17 Online: 25 de Agosto de 2008, 22:45:58 »


Don't care, he was drunk :D

http://clubecetico.org/forum/index.php/topic,12149.msg352011.html#msg352011



I see...
Once, I logged into the old Ateus.net forum completely drunk, ~6AM, to see some posts. In one, there was some kind of joke of "nice and happy and bull---- video with scream in the end." Since then, internet+alcohol is a never for me.
We need to do something like this to Fabulous :evil:
Monoteísmo é a hidra de Lerna. Con Kolivas estava certo sobre o desktop. Prozac não deixa tudo melhor. Aquiles devia ter escolhido os dois destinos, juntos. Coração sentimental + mente cética = aflição. Sou responsável pelo que digo, não pela sua interpretação sobre o que digo.

Offline JUS EST ARS

  • Nível 32
  • *
  • Mensagens: 2.128
  • Sexo: Masculino
Re: A wannabe forum constitution
« Resposta #18 Online: 25 de Agosto de 2008, 23:07:01 »


Hehehe.


 

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!