Announcements > Announcements
Discussing The Forum Rules
sts60:
The hyperbole was deliberate, but not serious. Let's just go with an injustice of, say Rhode Island-sized proportions.
Kiwi:
LunarOrbit:
I wonder if there should be a rule similar to the one at BAUT, about answering pertinent or direct questions in a timely matter.
--- Quote ---13B. Conspiracy Theories
...People will vigorously challenge your arguments; that's what skeptics do. If you cannot handle a frank and critical examination of your claims, then maybe you need to rethink discussing them here. All such discussions must be kept polite and respectful, by all parties.
You must defend your arguments and directly answer pertinent questions in a timely manner. Honestly answering "I don't know" is acceptable. Evasiveness will not be tolerated.
--- End quote ---
The late, unlamented Dr Socks was a great one for not answering questions and this can cause much frustration and wasted time for debunkers.
Chew:
--- Quote from: Kiwi on March 06, 2012, 05:31:10 AM ---LunarOrbit:
I wonder if there should be a rule similar to the one at BAUT, about answering pertinent or direct questions in a timely matter.
--- End quote ---
+1. But not as Nazified as the BAUT.
Glom:
--- Quote from: Kiwi on March 06, 2012, 05:31:10 AM ---LunarOrbit:
I wonder if there should be a rule similar to the one at BAUT, about answering pertinent or direct questions in a timely matter.
--- Quote ---13B. Conspiracy Theories
...People will vigorously challenge your arguments; that's what skeptics do. If you cannot handle a frank and critical examination of your claims, then maybe you need to rethink discussing them here. All such discussions must be kept polite and respectful, by all parties.
You must defend your arguments and directly answer pertinent questions in a timely manner. Honestly answering "I don't know" is acceptable. Evasiveness will not be tolerated.
--- End quote ---
The late, unlamented Dr Socks was a great one for not answering questions and this can cause much frustration and wasted time for debunkers.
--- End quote ---
What on the Moon possessed you to bring this up now? I really can't fathom.
But I agree with Chew's position. It sounds like a good rule to have, but not if we go to the point of then banning posters and closing threads because of a few transgressions.
gillianren:
Define "a few." I'm all for banning people over it if it becomes problematic.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version