PR Forum Guidelines. Updated July 2012. August 2016 update follows below.
These guidelines are based on the site rules and terms of service and also on previous moderator precedence. The site is first and foremost a support site. Regarding moderation of members’ posts the site is treated as though it has three categories and each category is treated slightly differently:
1. PPR
This is a special forum. It is for debating and as such pretty much anything goes provided it stays within the site rules and the following guidelines. It is more or less freedom of speech. It doesn't matter if some people have obnoxious or ill-informed opinions regarding politics, religion or virtually anything else. People can debate and criticize any religion, atheism, political party, public figures etc. Just because some members may belong to a particular religion (or atheism) or political party, does not exclude it from debate. If people want to criticize atheism that is fine. Criticise Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Paganism, Confucianism, Judaism, Satanism, Scientology etc all fine too.
Protected groups.
The site rules DO protect a few groups. So it is not acceptable to make posts that attack based on (a) gender, (b) race or (c) sexual orientation.
a) So creating sexist threads is not acceptable. It would be acceptable to discuss sexism itself however, for example regarding the glass ceiling in job promotions faced by many women or other social issues associated with sexism.
b) Creating threads attacking black people (or any other colour) is not acceptable. However, it is quite acceptable to discuss issues regarding racial tensions and racism itself. So there would be no problem debating why race riots occurred somewhere, but it would not be acceptable to say that a particular race smells bad or are stupid.
c) Creating threads referring to fa***ts or making offensive remarks about people who are gay, lesbian, queer, transgender etc is not acceptable. It is acceptable to debate sexuality itself and the reasons why some people are not heterosexual. It is also acceptable to talk about gay lifestyles and culture etc, though that is perhaps better done in the LGBT forum.
One final point on these protected groups. While threads can be made discussing "around" sexism, race and sexual orientation, if a member creates a significant number of threads about these topics it may start to look like he has an *agenda* i.e. is pushing the rules a bit too close to the edge attempting to provoke or belittle these groups; in which case moderators will intervene.
Other groups of people.
While it is acceptable to attack and debate beliefs (political, religious etc) it is not acceptable to make generalised attacks on the adherents of those beliefs. It is acceptable to say that Republicanism, Liberalism, Christianity, Islam are stupid but not acceptable to make generalised attacks saying that Republicans, Liberals, Christians or Muslims are morons. You could say that some of these people are stupid because of (reason) but not make generalised attacks on groups of people. Similarly you could not say "Christians are morons" or "Muslims are terrorists" or "People on welfare are bums". Confine your attacks to the beliefs and politics, not the people holding them. The one exception to this is public figures themselves – by the very nature of their roles they are personally open to criticism.
Personal attacks.
Posters must refrain from making personal attacks. Do not call people stupid or a***holes etc for not agreeing with you. You are allowed to think this - moderators aren't the thought police! Just don't express it in your posts! Attack the opinion not the poster. Personal attacks are a slightly fuzzy area because criticising someone's political or religious beliefs could be interpreted by some as a personal attack (but moderators do not consider it such) similarly it is easy to insinuate that someone is stupid for having various opinions but frankly the moderators don't have the time or inclination to wade through every post looking for sarcastic comments! Provided people don't get too out of hand this forum is given a wide scope for debate; which frankly is what the members themselves want here, not moderators stepping in all the time censoring their opinions.
2. The other forums (excluding PPR and The Haven)
Here the emphasis is on members sharing information, mutual support, general chit-chat and socialising. These forums are more heavily moderated than PPR and the rules applied more strictly. Moderators are the door-keepers to keep the party running smooth and any trouble makers kept in check. The same thread that can happily exist in PPR would not be allowed to exist in the Random forum for example. Hot topics of debate belong in PPR.
3. The Haven.
The Haven is protected more than any other forum on this site, so if someone is in distress and posts there it is for help and support from other members, not to debate with him/her about their religion or atheism or post anything that could cause further distress. Trying to persuade an atheist to pray to God or Jesus for support is not appropriate in the Haven, similarly attacking a believers religious views in the Haven is not appropriate either.
PPR now has a limit on new thread creation in order to discourage low-quality threads. A given user may make two new threads every 24 hours. Any additional threads that user makes will be locked.
Moderators will try to take a common-sense position on this issue. For example, if you make two threads and then are the first to post when the Pope is assassinated, we won't lock it.
If this rule is not working then it will be adjusted at the moderators' discretion.
In recent months, it has become increasingly clear that people are not reading these rules.
As a result, any thread made after this post that breaks these rules in the opening post will be locked, and the user will be formally warned. If a thread contains significant ongoing constructive discussion then the rule break may be edited out of the OP instead.
In particular, please pay attention to the rule banning attacks on groups of people. For avoidance of doubt, here are some contemporary examples which break that rule:
"Trump supporters are idiots"
"Only stupid people would vote for Clinton"
"The left will get upset at this"
"Conservatives get butthurt too easily"
"Feminists are evil"
The following would not break that rule:
"Trump supporters are ignoring the disastrous effects of his policies"
"Clinton supporters seem to be fine about the email thing"
"The left's economic theories have been discredited"
"Conservative views on abortion have harmed millions of women"
"Some feminists favour equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity: I think that's evil because it will harm industry"
"Hillary Clinton is stupid"
"Donald Trump is evil"
*******************
05 Aug 2020, 4:48 am
I'm willing to find out...
