Bashing/Insulting in Debates

This is starting to become a really big issue in our discussion forms, and we have to to something to stop it. One of the most important rules on the site, especially for debates, is that all discussions must remain respectful. So, I'm going to give a brief overview of the main problems, explain what we're doing, and you can ask any questions you have here.

1. "WOW!" "You really believe that?" and "Seriously??? LOL Who thinks that?" and "HAHA, that made me LAUGH."

Making comments that indicate you're amazed at how stupid you think someone's opinion is is no different than just bluntly calling them stupid. If anything, it's worse because you put yourself on some high horse above them. So, let's not do that anymore.

2. " *Insert something really offensive, probably profane*, but that's just my opinion. No offense, man!" and "I find your belief sickening."

Bashing anything cannot happen, even if it's your opinion. Someone will be offended, so find a better way to word how you feel. Just for the record, this includes bashing things like a religion, a politician, or an opinion.

3. "You obviously will never comprehend what I'm saying..." and "I'll never get through your thick skull?"

Even if you're not calling someone stupid, you can still insult their intelligence. Don't.

What We're Going to do

First, we're going to be moderating this section much more heavily, and we expect you to help by reporting people who break the rules. We don't want this to become a hateful, negative section of the site when it's intended to be enlightening.

Offenders can expect to be banned for a week, or more if the offense is severe enough. This rule starts right now, and if you've made a post within the last few days you think may be questionable, you have a clean slate, so don't worry. We have some very good users in this section of the site, so I don't expect this to be a problem anymore.

I really like this, thank you, Kurtni & of course, the rest of the amazing Mibba staff.

Is this starting now? Or will there be bans for things that have been said in the past? Maybe they will be removed?

Just wondering, because if so I can go back and find the things that I've said, but I'd rather not have to waste the time.

jessi has dreams:

Is this starting now? Or will there be bans for things that have been said in the past? Maybe they will be removed?

Just wondering, because if so I can go back and find the things that I've said, but I'd rather not have to waste the time.

We're not worried about things said in the past- everyone has a clean slate.

Number two is debateable... the whole point of a debate is two different, obviously clashing opinions. If you want to stress your opinion on a politician/opinion, its pretty much allowed. Anyone can find anything offensive. Like, to be as basic as possible, the two opposing opinions are offensive to the other debater. Its next to impossible to have a debate "not offensive" because the biggest debates are over morals and when people try to prove the other moral as "inhumane/wrong/bad/etc." it offends people. The biggest example is the Abortion debate. Ouch.

^ There are ways one can word things though, and on the whole, people may think many opinions are offensive to them, when in actual fact all it is is that they're contradictory to their own. What Kurtni means, I think, is that there is a difference between stating one's opinion and full-on bashing something. So if one does the former, no arguments (as in flaming arguments) are likely to be caused.

As far as Mibba is concerned, it's not debatable. Two different, clashing opinions can be discussed without insulting or demeaning comments, disguised with "it's my opinion."

You mentioned abortion
"Prolife supporters don't look closely enough at the struggle of an unwanted pregnancy, in my opinion" and "prolife supporters are a bunch of anti-feminist morons, no offense" are very different statements conveying a similar idea. You might offend someone with the first statement, but you're not bashing anyone, which is the difference.

Essentially, the point of that is to say you can't make bashing comments simply by justifying it with "in my opinion" or "no offense." If I were to amend the rule to clarify the meaning, what would you have me change?

^ "you can't make bashing comments simply by justifying it with "in my opinion" or "no offense."" Is clearer than what you have.

whhhattttt!?

^
Can you clarify?

To me, when people start bashing each other during debates they turn what should be a fun, informative discussion into a fight, which just isn't necessary. People should respect the differences in opinion or beliefs in others and view hearing their opinions as a learning experience, even if you don't agree with them. You can learn a lot just being aware of the differing ideas others have, even if debating with them doesn't change your mind on the topic at hand. Also, I think in a lot of cases people start throwing around insults when they get frustrated; maybe because the other person is making a good point they're struggling to continue arguing against, or because neither person will budge. If they're making a good point then the insulter needs to learn to be able to sometimes say "yeah, maybe you're right". In my opinion, that's a lot more respectable than actually being right and proving the other person wrong. and if it's neither person budging then I guess it just comes down to respecting each other's differences and moving on. A lot of the time there won't be any "winner" in a debate, but a lot of interesting things will be said and you can learn amore about each other, even if in the end it comes down to someone saying, "it doesn't seem like we're getting anywhere with this, so let's just agree to disagree and have a nice night".

Let's try to keep the bans fair though, because I've seen several times where both sides were bashing, but only one person was punished.

Also, I understand it's in the rules that someone does not have to be warned before they're banned, but I feel that's unfair. Especially considering the fact that some of the things that are considered ban worthy can be difficult to actually determine. Especially when it comes to tone. "Do you actually believe that?" could be perceived as condescending, but had actually been someone just honestly asking if the person really believes that.

CallusedSilk:

Let's try to keep the bans fair though, because I've seen several times where both sides were bashing, but only one person was punished.

Also, I understand it's in the rules that someone does not have to be warned before they're banned, but I feel that's unfair. Especially considering the fact that some of the things that are considered ban worthy can be difficult to actually determine. Especially when it comes to tone. "Do you actually believe that?" could be perceived as condescending, but had actually been someone just honestly asking if the person really believes that.

Agreed wholeheartedly with the above statement

^ I also agree with these two. Tone is very hard to convey in text a lot of the time, and I feel like unless it's clear that someone is doing something ban-worthy on purpose, a warning isn't too much to ask for. It'd be a shame to have members end up banned simply due to a misunderstanding.