Castin

Fair point. I don't care tbh but SHES a hypocrite and an over reactor 

Everything I say she decides to respond to it with a snarky comment. Then she said the most stupidest thing since Trump wet hurricane. She said I write my poems about the people on here! That shit was funny and I called her stupid and she attacked me more until she said "Hitler was a fascist poet." That crossed the line for someone who could take that to offense. I reported her bc it was something to find her guilty of

Do I care, No she is obviously crazy.

Do I like her, No

Was this an opportunity to ban her, yes. so i took advantage of it

Probably not, the crazy people will be crazy and the sane will leave, then it will just be a forum of crazy people. Oh well.

I don't disagree - why do people assume everything has to be adversarial!

I wanted to stress the non-monolithic nature of islam.  Maybe I shouldn't have said 'But...'!

What if the subject of the trial started the trial thread?  Then it couldn't be interpreted as a call out thread.  Obviously, it wouldn't work as a general rule, but just for the experiment.  

History has proven that there is only one way to deal with Islam. It's called a Crusade. It is the goal Islam to rule the entire world and to exterminate all other religions while making sharia the only law . They will never quit. This has been proven by many centuries of history. The only way to combat Islam is through genocide. And even then, it's only a temporary fix.

I would just like to add in my own defence that there are a lot of valid reasons for having a separate account for personal and official purposes.  But perhaps you're right that we should make it clear when we have more than one account.  I'll talk to the team and draft a policy statement. 

The doctrine and dogma of the catholic church is set centrally.   Islam is even less centralised than protesant sects.  There is no priestly hierarchy of vicar, bishop, archibishop etc in islam.   The leader of each mosque has considerable power and autonomy.

If you really want to learn, go to an Orthodox church and talk to a priest.

Which mosque did you learn Islam at?

So much for that fantasy that the government, and by extension...all the alphabet agencies... are accountable to the people. The things people teach kids these days...

I don't like RM, but I would listen to his case

Once I was a Master Shitposter in the service of Lord Wylted, chief architect of the great final DDO Empire, and the greatest troll of his time. I could not match the genius of Lord Wylted, but what he could envision, I and the Plastics could build. All of that is gone forever. I still retain my cunning, but my hands and eyes fail me, and my memories have long faded. My only consolation is each day to mock the mods who destroyed my race, and condemned me to this bleak existence.

I appreciate that, but as trials are a non-starter, we can only discuss them hypothetically. So I'm talking about them with you in the only way that's really possible, as I see it. The only alternative is to not hear you out at all. 

I'm more interested in seeing how they work than speculating. Admittedly, I don't know one way or another what ramifications a structured trial would work nor does anybody. If you don't want to hear me out at all, that's your prerogative, but you'll forgive me if I think the words "trials are a non-starter" is a pretty solid indicator of you not wanting to hear me out at all. Now if you are interested in hearing me out and just have some legit concerns about the effects a mere experiment would have, that's different and I'm happy to address them!

Who holds the FBI accountable for malfeasance?

I think we should all be able to agree, probably not people being investigated by the FBI.

Why not? Seems like those victims would be the people most motivated to expose malfeasance.

Yes

You know, the most charitable benefit of the doubt type readings of the Koran might give the impression that... sure, uh.. maybe this is a religion of peace...

It becomes a lot harder after you read the hadith.

We don't need to speculate about what would and wouldn't happen with a structured trial, Castin. Not when we can simply conduct an experiment and make conclusions afterwards. I happen to disagree that the trial of some no-name user nobody cares about would "stir up" drama, but there's only one objective way to find out. At which point if the idea ends up being a disaster, we can all agree it forum-trials suck and move on!

As I said in my OP, the prosecution and defense will ultimately have to agree on who is/isn't part of the jury. The first thing I would do after getting enough volunteers is to have the prosecutor and defense attorney engage in the real world process known as Voir Dire. They would ultimately determine who was in the jury by process of elimination. Should this process get implemented on an official level, we can go even further with jury selection techniques. Comparing jury trials is mob rule is akin to comparing moderators to dictators IMO. It's an absolute extreme of what can happen without the proper precautions taken on the front end.

If you accept just any volunteer for juror I think you'd be leaning closer toward mob rule. How would you ensure that responsible people are selected for the jury? 

You could have a mod review all the jurors' votes and just remove any they don't like. 

How would you address the concern that this would turn every ban into a drawn-out drama circus?

Anyone who complains about a ban (or about a non-ban) gets banned.

How would you address the concern that this would turn every ban into a drawn-out drama circus?

From what I can tell on DART thusfar, literally every ban is already a drawn-out drama circus. Hell, I wouldn't have even started this thread if not for the litany of threads about RM on the first two pages. My impression was that the mods were not concerned with drama circuses per se, though that too could be addressed by simply plugging trials into a separate sub-forum akin to the other categories (Arts, games, science, politics, religion, etc) and keeping the main page free and clear of "drama." Out of sight out of mind if you will!  Though the only assured way to avoid a drama circus is not to ban anybody. Beyond that, moderate the thread like you would any other!

What if the title was "Think Christianity is a religion of peace? Think again", and all the following posts had been targeted at Christianity.

To do that properly you have to imagine the item linked to is a polemic against Christianity full of half-truths and cherry-picked quotations beret of their context intended to inflame anti-Chrisitian sentiment. 

If that was the case there'd be no need for me to say anything - loads of Christian DA members would have got in first!   But becase the target is Islam such material goes not merely unchallenged but endorsed, even by many people who are in general terms 'liberal'.

There's plenty not to like about Islam and of course there is a political problem that needs addressing.   But I don't think the best way forward is to spread anti-Islamic and anti-Muslim populist propaganda.  Scratch that - it's the worse possible way forward.

All of that is interesting and makes sense.

To be honest I'm glad to not be an atheist any more because (in the US especially) atheism has developed into this weird cottage industry of smug intellectual kitsch.

I agree with this.

I usually just identify as “non-religious,” for the same reason.

Well, I say things but I don't hear a voice. That's really, really, rare, and usually involves some sort of apparition or command to carry out a great holy work.

Atheists worship beer because beer saved the world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcLasNk4i-c

It's not important. I have found that you don't need meditation. All you need is sincerity in your heart.