This just came to mind after recently reading over some threads in the Chit Chat and Current Events, World News & LGBT News forums. Anyways, I was just noticing a bunch of controversial and/or serious topics that really don't belong in either of those forums that would be better off in a debate/serious discussion sub-forum where these kind of topics can be discussed in a much more serious and open to argue in a courteous manner. I only bring this up because it is kind of jarring to see threads about subjects such as debates on religion, political clashes and equality among threads about "what is your preference on such and such" or "what do you like about this". Also a debate/serious discussion sub-forums can allow for arguments or debates happening in a current thread to be moved there to allow for the debate to continue and prevent a thread from being locked over said debate. Lastly as for rules I think that as long as the topic doesn't go too off the rails, then it's fine. But that's all I have got for that and I think such a sub-forum would be good for cleaning up those threads that keep popping up in Chit Chat and Current News (although less so in Current News).
Here are my (non-representative of the staff) thoughts on the matter: 1) Oftentimes the line between civil/debate and argument gets blurred when you can justify it with "people are just passionate about the subject", so it may be hard to classify which threads can/should be moved. 2) The forum in its entirety is a support forum first and foremost. Just because there are more social/casual subforums does not mitigate the fact that the Code of Conduct still applies and should be followed. Having a forum dedicated to allowing people to argue would break down the idea of a safe/supportive atmosphere. There are many guests who never make an account, and if their first impression of the site is an argument between two people, they may turn and never come back. 3) People should be capable of discussing a serious topic without it escalating to an argument (this is coming from someone who loves to argue).
I agree with nearly all you have said except the first impression of the site with guests. They can still have a bad first impression with some of the threads especially with certain ones, for example the heated arguments over circumcision and the bashing over theistic beliefs. But those could just be the usual arguments and I am just not accustomed to such topics. You are correct that this is first and foremost a support forum and I guess I just felt maybe a debate/serious discussion forum would be useful not just for arguments (I did not mean to phrase it that way) but for civil discussio on issues or different views on certain topics LGBT or not. It's just I've seen other forums with it and thought it could be a good thing to implement because of some of the things discussed here. Anyways, thank-you for your input on the idea.
I support this idea, it's nice to have debates or discussions on subjects of a serious matter. I think most people know what's acceptable and what's not; opposing views may offend some, but as long as people aren't personally attacking others I don't see the problem. Maybe the staff can add a disclaimer letting people know that if they're easily offended by people challenging or criticizing their beliefs or views they shouldn't view or post in the section. Of course those who are just blatantly bashing or indirectly attacking others should be weeded out though.
^ oh, with that point I was referring more to the fact that it could be difficult for the staff to decide what should/shouldn't be moved. If there are argumentative/heated debating posts in the forums we have now, the staff usually end up taking action by posting or PMing asking the users to tone it down. The only difference with this new subforum would be that the action is just moving the activity to it's own subforum... but that still doesn't really fix the fact that the heated behaviour is still going on. Don't get me wrong - I'm not entirely opposed to the idea. In fact, I enjoy debates too, so if it came to light in a way that works for everyone, I'd be happy with that. I'm just not sure how to make that happen.
Yeah, as long as there aren't biased moderators i'd think it should be fine though. I say that because I was a member on another site and one of the moderators was incredibly homophobic and would unfairly pick and choose which topics to close/move and who to ban based on who he personally agreed with. Anyways, I think a good rule of thumb for moderators is to just not intervene in these discussions if some peoples views or opinions offends others, unless of course, as I said earlier, people are blatantly bashing or personally attacking others. Some people have strong opinions on some topics so naturally they might be more passionate about it, but as long as it doesn't cross that line I don't see a problem personally.
The thing is (again, speaking only for myself, and not for the staff or for EC as an organization), there are a bazillion places where such debates can and do take place on the 'net, and since EC is first and foremost a support community, I don't personally see a value in doing anything to encourage more debate here, given so many other places to do that. Same reason we don't have a lot of discussions about art, music, drug use, and other topics that are covered much more in-depth on other communities. The serious debate threads are a tiny portion of the overall discussion on EC, but probably represent 30 to 50% of the total time our moderation team spends dealing with problematic threads and posts. So for that reason alone, it wouldn't be a good use of staff resources to encourage and expand such discussion. (For what it's worth, that's true also of many other communities I've been involved with.)
I agree with Chip on that there are a lot of pages out there where people argue and debate things, and the line between what is "good discussion" and simply personal attacks and arguments blur. It`s so easy to get upset during discussions like that, because once the all out argument breaks loose people tend to forget that they`re talking to another human being, and forget to think before they post. What makes EC so comfortable is that it`s a controlled, safe and guarded environment. If people are like me, they might want to get into the discussion, because they have opinions on the matter, but then end up getting burned by some of the comments. Besides, I can imagine it being a moderator "hell", when you have to constantly guard over a forum like that, considering how easy it is for people to slip up and write something, then posting it, in the heat of debate. And then you`ll have to discuss why that was unacceptable compared to what the other member said, that was essentially the same in meaning, just with a different wording. I see that as taking a lot of time, that would be better spent giving support (mind me, that`s just how I imagine it, from own experiences, that if moderators have to spend too much time safe-guarding, it leaves less time for support giving). And this is a support forum, after all.
With the topic of being a 'moderator hell' there can always be a rule enforced in that particular subforum where Keeping on-topic and keeping civil (no flaming, trolling, threats, etc) are key. There's no reason to think people are unable to follow such rules.
Sadly, this forum has proven time and time again that people ARE unable to follow these rules. That's where the hell comes from: we either have these rules and are forced to enforce them (which is a lot of work), or we don't have these rules and then the site as a whole suffers.
We already enforce those rules in the forum at large, and unfortunately, we have plenty of experience (nevermind reason) that shows that some members aren't able to follow them. (One could say that it's not that they aren't able, it's that they choose not to, but the end result is the same for us.)
If everyone consistently followed the Code of Conduct, which comprises all the rules and policies that the mod team uses to ensure the site runs smoothly, then we wouldn't have any need for moderators and staff. The staff size is 25 and growing, because it takes that many of us to keep track of everything and keep our policies properly in place. So unfortunately, I have to agree with Budder that a self-moderated forum simply woudln't work.
I think we can manage without it just scroll down to any random you tube video comment section and you will get your debate/argument fill.
