Total posts: 2,627
Christianity has been a force for great good and great ill, and I think it's unfair to reduce it to only its ills, but the point about divine absolution disincentivizing apologies is a good one.
Created:
Posted in:
Haven't seen people having this much fun with a ban protest since the days of bsh1.
He would've come in here to defend the ban too.
New mods are silent. New mods watch from the citadel. New mods are wise.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
It was an obvious racist parody account. Always sounded like Cartman pretending to be a black lady.Correct, neither of which violate any rules.
Idk, the new CoC you guys voted on in April is weird.
- Users are encouraged to present well-reasoned arguments and avoid logical fallacies. We do not permit the worst forms of trolling, such as spamming, posting irrelevant or inflammatory content, or engaging in personal attacks. However, we do allow more borderline forms of trolling that are intended to provoke thought or stimulate debate, as long as they are presented in a respectful and thoughtful manner.
What is "borderline trolling." If it's constructive, respectful, and thoughtful it isn't trolling.
Anyway, you're right, I don't see anything in the new CoC that she violated. Maybe you could say she was guilty of trolling? But you can now argue she was only a "borderline troll" or something.
~Borderline trolls~ We entertain you within the gray areas of the lawwwww
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
Too short. DARTMcFartDDebaAteArRtTTartarsauce.com
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Always suspected. Definitely his style.
Created:
Posted in:
It was an obvious racist parody account. Always sounded like Cartman pretending to be a black lady.
Created:
Posted in:
Many of you seem to really want to keep the DART element. Would you be opposed to DebateDart.com?
Sounds a bit unique, sidesteps some people's concerns that we may be mistaken for a website that discusses art, and our icon could be a bull's eye.
Created:
Selective honesty, masking, and white lies are necessary evils in many social situations. But deception in politics can be incredibly harmful; deception in close relationships can be hurtful and lead to breakups or estrangement; weaponized for manipulation, as in gaslighting, it can cause serious trauma. The quality of a lie is highly contextual. I don't think you can make the argument that they're inherently good or evil.
If everyone was vomit-the-truth honest all the time, it would probably destroy society. But I don't think being an honest person should be understood to mean "be vomit-the-truth honest all the time." Being honest in general is fine enough.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
I think you're conflating honesty with having no filter.Having filter means you dont say what you think.
Yes, it's called selective honesty. And it is good.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
There are many cases where telling the truth is horrible.1. Telling ugly person that he is ugly2. Telling random girl you see that she turned you on and that you want to fuck her now3. Telling people your passwordIf everyone was honest, it would be maybe okay as a whole, but when you are the one being honest, it will screw you up likely.
I think you're conflating honesty with having no filter.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
Honest person is stupid. Smart person lies and hides his intentions.
Deception is exhausting.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
The reason this is true is because low capacity to control oneself in swearing is likely directly correlated with low capacity to control oneself in opinions stated.
Thank you, I try.
Created:
"... suggesting that individuals who use profanity more often are less likely to lie and deceive, and exhibit higher integrity at both individual and societal levels."
I AM VINDICATED, FUCKERS.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
If this was a business meaning the execs would be laughing.DebateArt to DebateCraft is not a rebranding, it's just a tweak from Dart to Daft. 😂
You have a point, they are very similar. That may be part of the appeal for some, though.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
DART.com-Castin?
Can't take credit. I believe this was Mikal's suggestion.
Created:
Posted in:
DebateCraft is still my fave. I don't think DebateGate has the same je ne sais quoi. I only suggested it bc some folks felt that DebateCraft sounded like "an instore niche section for handicraft folk." (It doesn't and I'll die on that hill.)
Created:
Posted in:
Ted is spinning scripture to support his identity politics, as people have always done and will always do. What God tells Abraham in Genesis applies to Abraham and his people -- the people of Israel, not the state of Israel.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Against what or who are we revolting?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
There's story in the sense that the world, places, and individuals have history, motivations, lore.I suppose a lot, though not all of the story is indirectly inferred, perhaps 'imagined and theorized by players.Discovered in tiny pieces and put together.But there's not story 'so 'much, in the sense of getting quests or character development of NPCs.No game given goals.I just found it fun to run around the world, gathering people, items, money, skills, buy a house, build a base, kill some faction leaders such as bandits and cannibals, fight stuff, explore.Haven't played it in a while.
Ah, thank you. A bit disappointing. But maybe an opportunity to learn to appreciate a different kind of game.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LucyStarfire
Why air? I invested in fire at start and now am mostly using earth. I got nothing in air. I keep checking the Society vendors and can't find very many protection spells. Bit irksome.
Armor levels so quick I'm just constantly swapping my gear for ever bulkier stuff that doesn't match. I wish I could keep my simple hoodie from the beginning.
If I do this Skelden quest to catch a Karga rebel, will it cost me reputation with Karga or destroy Karga quest opportunities later?
Created:
One of the more interesting scholarly theories (to me, anyway) is that Genesis 1 and 2 are separate creation stories that were eventually put together and read as one. They base this in part on the numerous conflicts between the two.
In Gen 1, God makes humankind male and female to begin with; there is no making man and then realizing he erred in not providing a companion. In Gen 1 he creates the world, the animals and plants, and tells humans to be fruitful and multiply, as if he made Earth and then immediately set humans at large within it, without an initial paddocking in Eden.
Then Gen 2 comes along, and excepting its first paragraph, which may have been a later addition to provide some continuity, it can be read as a completely separate narrative. We start all over. The plants have not yet been made, the animals have not yet been made, and God begins our race with just the human male form. The animals and birds he makes only because he realizes Adam is alone and doesn't want him to be. Ditto for the female form.
So in Gen 1 I get the vibe that he intended the Darwinian natural order to begin with. But in Gen 2 I get the impression that he intended Eden to be idyllic, with Adam and Eve described as eating only fruits and things, and the brutality of nature came later.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgim
You very often make threads oriented toward near death experiences, out of body experiences, and visions of the afterlife. Can I ask why you have such an interest in this subject?
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
Ooh, I like the addition of "fun" to it. This is why I liked Savant's netspat.com. Sounded casual and cute. But I guess I'm the only netspat stan.
DebateGate reminded me of our endless forum scandals and dramas, but maybe that's a little too honest... DebateCraft sounds neat and feels the most similar to DebateArt.
And Savant would make a fine mod.
Created:
I found netspat catchy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
From my perspective, you have conformed to mainstream Christianity, the most popular religion on Earth. Not saying there's anything wrong with that, just that it doesn't strike me as iconoclastic.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
You know I get upset when people talk bad of me. Its annoying. Like, you dont even know me 😣
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
TikTok is either letting outrageous content pass or banning good content for no reason. I follow so many people on TikTok whose videos are randomly taken down for violations that have nothing to do with the content of the video. Dylan Page recently had every video of his taken down at once and then his account locked, for... drumroll... no reason. And it's a pain in the ass getting it undone, too. A science teacher I follow regularly has his educational vids pulled because a rando makes a complaint that they're anti-religion or something, and easy as that they're gone.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
You might as well ask why people want to be seen as having value, I suppose. Goodness is a common social value, along with strength, attractiveness, etc.
That's in general.
Personally I want to be seen as good because I know what it's like to experience cruelty and indifference, and I don't want people to perceive me as purveyors of those things -- to see me the way I saw my abusers. I want to be seen as their antithesis, in fact.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
I've found that on huge platforms like Youtube moderating can be either extremely laissez-faire or absolutely aggressive and arbitrary (TikTok).
Created:
"DebateFox" is available.DebateGate sounds pretty nice, but just wondering, what does it have relation to this website?Sounds like a scandal. MasterDebater is a poor brand for similar reasons.
You are silent on this one so I'm going to mark it down as passing the vibe check. *scribbles on paper*
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
You're not going anywhere, I still need help with Two Worlds. The game is so old and obscure you can't even google some of this shit.
People have always complained the site is overmoderated even though I've never seen policies here any stronger than any other website I've been on.
Created:
So far the most popular seem to be
DebateCraft
lidebate
DebateOwl
DART.com where DART is an acronym for something we make up
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
It doesnt really matter what is the name of site.
IT MATTERS KEVIN
Created:
-->
@21Pilots
A quick explanation on why I chose debate craft for those who are confused ;It has relation to debating as you craft your arguments and also sounds quite smooth in my opinion.
I liked it because it sounded cool and was reminiscent enough of "debateart" to feel like a thematic successor.
Created:
-->
@21Pilots
DebateGate sounds pretty nice, but just wondering, what does it have relation to this website?
Just a complete rebrand. Like DebateScape, DebateOwl, DebateThingy, MasterDebater.com (masterbater for short).
People continue to have issues with the arts and crafts themes apparently.
I like debatecraft.com, myself.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
I like DebateOwl. Simple, friendly.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Debate Craft sounds like an instore niche section for handicraft folk.
Hmm.
DebateGate?
Created:
-->
@Savant
Think I would like debatebox more than debatecube.
Created:
I suppose we would call it DC for short. DC has less dash than DART, but debatecraft > debateart, definitely.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
I don't understand those advocating for morality or word policing here. David literally already tried that and saw both the number of members on the site drop by 80% and the quality of the debaters also declined to best Korea level
You're an extremophile who thrives on controversy. Overpolicing would destroy your natural habitat. Others are more sensitive, would like more oversight and a feeling of order/safety, and laissez-faire policy would destroy their natural habitat. We're just fighting over the thermostat.
Did site attendance really drop that far? Someone help me out with some solid info here.
Created:
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Formalized and professional, but with a casual touch on it too.
I like dis.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
That is literally because we weren't choosy or authoritarian. You have it so backwards.Reddit is extremely popular amd censors 4x as much as here.
We're talking about a simple rebrand here, to make the site simple and inviting to new eyes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Oh, that's not true. You just have high rejection sensitivity. I liked you.
If I'm remembering what you're talking about, that was a list of people who had left the site that I missed, and you hadn't left yet, that I knew of. Also, very much not aware of anyone telling you to kill yourself.
One of the things I respected about you was your liberal values, but it seems you have departed from them considerably. Can't pretend not to be sad about that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
I preferred it when you were an iconoclast, tbh. But if finding religion has brought you any measure of peace, I'm glad.
Created:
Posted in:
This is serious stuff I struggled with when I was considering whether to become Christian. I knew I disagreed on a deep level with so many passages in the Bible, while others genuinely resonated. Was I going to create my own interpretive framework that allowed me to embrace the passages that spoke to me, and dismiss the passages that did not? As so many other Christians did? Then I wouldn't really be following the Bible, I would be following my own judgment. The Bible itself says to trust in God's judgment, not your own. Was that a doctrine I could set aside and still call myself a Christian? And what was God's judgment, anyway, amongst so many conflicting passages, so many literary and historical strata -- and how could I ever cobble together a moral framework from it that I liked, but was still defensible as "biblical"? Simply put, I couldn't.
Created:
Posted in:
When the Bible disagrees with modern morality, believers do one of two things.
The first is they'll leverage modern morality over and against the Bible -- which looks a lot like the responses in this thread. Deploying renegotiations with the text, reinterpretations, apologist arguments, semantics, and so on, all to make the point that the plain reading of the text isn't actually God's position on the matter.
The second is just the opposite: they will leverage the text over and against modern morality. This is more commonly demonstrated in Christians' stance on homosexuality, where suddenly the plain reading of the text is just fine.
The thing is, you could just as easily renegotiate God's position on homosexuality as his position on slavery. And in fact, liberal Christians do exactly that, arguing that God is not homophobic. But I'm willing to lay odds that many of the Christians in this thread would argue those liberals are twisting God's message and denying the plain reading of scripture.
So why argue so hard to renegotiate the Bible on slavery, but not homosexuality? Identity politics. Personal preference. Culture. The Bible says what the reader allows it to say. Conservatives allow it to prohibit homosexual sex, but do not allow it to condone slavery. And that's it. The truth is that the Bible is never the real authority on anything. Identity politics are.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
No. It can definitely backfire.If we get more forum sh##posters instead of more actual dedicated debaters, it backfires and disgusts or erodes away the passion and joy.You have to beg for a vote. Your debates are so scary as you put all that effort in for 0 outcome often. We need to get less of the wylteds and more of the Lancelots. Then we can handle taming the Lancelots later.
Frankly, we can't afford to be choosy. The site is a slowly evaporating puddle as it is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@yachilviveyachali
You will continue to believe whatever serves your faith, and that's fine. On the one hand, I'm glad you've reinterpreted scripture; I don't want people to believe in a slaver God. On the other hand, I'm troubled to see otherwise good people defending slavery. In any other context, they would never be apologists for slavery. Yet because we're talking about the biblical God, suddenly they're telling me that slavery was good for people, that it was normal at the time and so should get a pass, that they had to do it. That's bonkers, and I feel like y'all don't see how bonkers it really is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LucyStarfire
Combat focus with magic support. I don't even have any protection spells, I've just been blasting fireball and that earth spell that immobilizes. Welp. Guess I know what I need to get.
Created: