Question About Political/Religious Rules (And no, this isn't political or religious)

[Sir Robin Hood]

I've been confused about something for awhile regarding the banning of religious and political threads. And no, this is not religious or political, just a question about the rules regarding said subjects.

With that being said, here is a direct quote from the thread announcing the end of both subjects on the DIS.

POLITICS AND RELIGION are no longer acceptable topics of discussion here.

Here's another one:

Posts and threads of a political or religious nature will be locked or deleted, and are not to be restarted

and finally...

There are many sites on the web that welcome discussion and debate of a political or religious nature, but we feel that removing these topics from the DISboards altogether is in the best interests of our members.

Pretty straight forward; makes sense.

Here's my question (THIS IS NOT A VENT!!!) Just a question. To prove I am not trying to stir up something or heated about anything, I will post a dancing food product for your enjoyment: <---See
Okay, on to my question.

I've noticed several threads pop up where members can post Bible verses, scripture, etc of a religious nature. (For the record, I am FINE with that and not complaining about such threads.) See look, another dancing banana. Not complaining here.
These pop up quite often. One on Christian music, and posters are encouraged to post their favorite scriptures of a religious nature. (Once again, no beef with this).
Those religious threads and weekly Bible verse threads are allowed to go under the radar and are exempt from the discussion board rules.

The rules bend for threads quoting religious scripture, so if a friendly thread ever started quoting political speeches, does it get to slide under the radar also? For example: Let's say someone started a thread (like the posters who start "Romans 2: 4-..." or "Psalms 5:1...") a thread called "Obama Speech: 8/2/09" or "Bush Interview: 2006".

Which would be breaking the stated board rules? Not venting, just would kindly like to know.

 

[Sir Robin Hood]

Remember folks, not flaming, venting or complaining, just want to find something out.
Which one is breaking the stated board rules?: "Mark Chapter 4 verse 3", or "Obama on Healthcare July '09". A thread on Christian Music & Scripture, or a thread on Democrat/Republican accomplishments? Simple as that.

Oh heck, one last dancing banana.

 

[Sparx]

Remember folks, not flaming, venting or complaining, just want to find something out.
Which one is breaking the stated board rules?: "Mark Chapter 4 verse 3", or "Obama on Healthcare July '09". A thread on Christian Music & Scripture, or a thread on Democrat/Republican accomplishments? Simple as that.

Oh heck, one last dancing banana.

if we're taking the rules to the letter, both are.

 

[RNMOM]

I feel you are asking good questions but am not sure there is a clear answer. I have been at the DIS for more than 10 years and have seen many changes, some I like, others not so much. Most important I have learned that I am a guest and as such must abide by the rules. I practice this and have gotten along fine. On the very few occassions I have been unhappy/dismayed I have chosen to IM someone I trust and vent/reassure/and generally discuss until I am again comfortable.

When you have a venue with so many people on it as the DIS has you must provide clear guidelines. Some people can 'skirt' those by being well meaning and clearly not trying to stir up problems and that is why I think the Bible verses remain. They don't bother me but I don't open them either. I visit here nearly daily but post only when I feel I have something to say that is different from what has already been said.

Sometimes it is best not to try to figure out every little issue. Sometimes it just "is".

BTW, I enjoyed your dancing bananas.

 

[Sir Robin Hood]

More dumb questons...

So let's take this hypothetical scenario. Let's say, for example the heated rivalry in MLB between the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees got over extreme (just an example). Let's say this caused many heated and controversial debates on the DIS between BoSox fanatics and NYY fanatics. Things were getting outta hand.

At the same time, heated debates were being sparked by NFL fans between the Dallas Cowboys and Green Bay Packers. NFL debates were getting out of hand just like MLB.

The Mods finally had enough and created new rules for the DIS boards which were to be understood and followed:
Absolutely NO discussions of Baseball or Football will be allowed any more.

Time goes by things cool off. Yet every week, certain posters start new threads for Yankee faithful to discuss NYY. Other threads pop up (not a lot, but here and there) for Red Sox Nation.
But at the same time all these Yankee/BoSox threads are sliding under the radar one at a time, with absolutely no problem with the Mods who enforce the rules, any time a thread turns to the subject of NFL Football, it usually gets locked. (??) A new thread solely about the Yanks or Sox habitually pops up every other week. Yet any time a thread, even about a completely different subject, mentions too much about the NFL teams....oops, "This thread has gotten too Football-ish and is being locked."

Standing firm and enforcing one yet letting the other slide a bit...does this make the board rules credible? (Just a question).
Something to think about. Once again, no opinion or complaint from me, only questions.

BTW, I enjoyed your dancing bananas

You mean these... Thanks. They make the thread cheerful.

both are

which sparks my final question for the mods...

 

[RNMOM]

As I have been known to say in my own life...."my sandbox, my rules". Fair, maybe not to all or in everyone's opinion but we don't pay anything to be here. You can contribute if you wish but it is not mandatory. I choose to not sweat things so much but I will send an PM to the mod's if I feel things are getting out of hand on a topic.

I know you are truly trying not to be argumentative but I think you are headed that way soon. Perhaps even raising the issue in your kind of way will cause some powers to be to think about what is going on and change it if they feel necessary.

 

[maelstrom]

I've noticed several threads pop up where members can post Bible verses, scripture, etc of a religious nature. ... Those religious threads and weekly Bible verse threads are allowed to go under the radar and are exempt from the discussion board rules.

These threads *do* bother me, and I'd really like an answer as to why, when no religious or political discussion is allowed, people still continue to post bible verse threads and that's somehow okay. No dancing produce here; the double standard here really irritates me.

 

[KristinBelle]

It's not a double standard because when they announced the rule it was stated it implied to religious debates or "my religion is better then yours" stuff.

 

[Mrs.Toad]

I agree, it's confusing, but I also agree with the pp who said something about posts being well-meaning.

The political threads I've seen on the DIS rarely remained well-intended and almost always degenerated into name-calling within the first few pages. Even threads which were devoted to one party or another were full of back-handed put-downs of those belonging to other parties.

The religious threads I've seen remaining since the banning consist simply of sharing Bible verses or asking for prayers for loved ones in need. I don't look at them all that often, but I don't see any doctrinal debate, or those put-downs of others (backhanded or otherwise), which is probably why they are allowed to remain.

Here, I will add some fun smilies to show that I am well-intended with my comments, too!

 

[Patch'sD]

The rules are grey, and have made for a (IMHO) very boring board, I used to debate but loved to get other's opinions on very important issues. Since the posting of the scriptures does not spawn any debate or issues they will be left alone. By the way the Red Sox stink. Yankee fan here.

 

[sbell111]

More dumb questons...

So let's take this hypothetical scenario. Let's say, for example the heated rivalry in MLB between the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees got over extreme (just an example). Let's say this caused many heated and controversial debates on the DIS between BoSox fanatics and NYY fanatics. Things were getting outta hand.

At the same time, heated debates were being sparked by NFL fans between the Dallas Cowboys and Green Bay Packers. NFL debates were getting out of hand just like MLB.

The Mods finally had enough and created new rules for the DIS boards which were to be understood and followed:
Absolutely NO discussions of Baseball or Football will be allowed any more.

Time goes by things cool off. Yet every week, certain posters start new threads for Yankee faithful to discuss NYY. Other threads pop up (not a lot, but here and there) for Red Sox Nation.
But at the same time all these Yankee/BoSox threads are sliding under the radar one at a time, with absolutely no problem with the Mods who enforce the rules, any time a thread turns to the subject of NFL Football, it usually gets locked. (??) A new thread solely about the Yanks or Sox habitually pops up every other week. Yet any time a thread, even about a completely different subject, mentions too much about the NFL teams....oops, "This thread has gotten too Football-ish and is being locked."

Standing firm and enforcing one yet letting the other slide a bit...does this make the board rules credible? (Just a question).
Something to think about. Once again, no opinion or complaint from me, only questions.

Mods aren't perfect and they aren't all knowing. If you believe a post or thread doesn't follow the board rules, report it.

 

[Aisling]

Sir Robin and maelstrom, I'd guess those kinds of threads are ok because they don't incite debate. I've yet to see someone say "go to hell, that Christian song you posted is a piece of crap and you're an idiot."

 

[Sanchez]

These threads *do* bother me, and I'd really like an answer as to why, when no religious or political discussion is allowed, people still continue to post bible verse threads and that's somehow okay. No dancing produce here; the double standard here really irritates me.

And yet the Bill Clinton love fest with cheers from the usual suspects continues . . .

The point is that everyone can argue a double standard at some time or another.

 

[DizBelle]

It's not a double standard because when they announced the rule it was stated it implied to religious debates or "my religion is better then yours" stuff.

The policy states "religion and politics are no longer acceptable topics of discussion."

This doesn't say anything about debate. So, debate or not, well-meaning or not, the policy is that religion and politics are not acceptable.

 

[DizBelle]

Sir Robin and maelstrom, I'd guess those kinds of threads are ok because they don't incite debate. I've yet to see someone say "go to hell, that Christian song you posted is a piece of crap and you're an idiot."

Again, the policy doesn't say anything about debate.

I've asked this same question many times and never got an answer. I've reported threads that clearly violate the policy but they remain.

I don't understand how they expect us to follow the rules when the enforcement doesn't match the statement of the policy.

If religion is not an acceptable topic of discussion, then the christian music threads and the bible verse threads and signatures should be closed and prohibited. Period.

 

[DizBelle]

I guess it was bound to happen. I got a warning. But I don't understand why and have requested clarification. Hopefully I will get a clarification of the rule.