Total Posts:38|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Voluntary Code of Honour

Unitomic
Posts: 591
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2014 1:23:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I've been in several forums, and this seems to be something that has worked well in other forums, so I figured give it a shot here.

There are many things that are technically allowed on this site, that are simply not "gentlemanly" so to say. We can do these things, but it's simply rude and not something we should be proud of doing. So I think we should have a "Code of Honour", a list of things that we should and shouldn't do, even if they are technically allowed. As the title says, it would be voluntary. A set of rules we have personally agreed to with the hope of making ourselves better, and hopefully making the site better. It obviously would be faith-based, no one can get in trouble if they accidentally break their "oath" so to say (which most of us will do time to time). They can however be reminded of their promise by others.
Now I know this may not have an impact on the site much, but it's more about being able to say we aren't among the people who negatively affect the quality of discussion on the site.

I'm sure you've notice no rules have been listed. This is because rather then post my own views and asking people to agree, I would like us to discuss what would be in the code of honour, so as to ensure it follows the general consensus of those who would like to see it done.
If you don't like the code, you don't have to accept it, so don't throw a fit over it please.

Now as the guy starting this, i'll take naming rights mwahahaha. Unitary Code mwahaha. But it is important for it to have a name as that would give a title to take pride behind, rather then just a vague description. I know it sounds alot like my username, but the name actually comes from the idea that by coming together under a certain cause, we can unite to make ourselves better as a whole. By improving ourselves, we can make the group better, which in turn gives us greater opportunities to further improve ourselves, and so on.

But the reason for the name isn't important, it's the content that matters. What do you think should be included in this code? Why?

==Unitomic==
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2014 3:10:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/5/2014 1:23:27 AM, Unitomic wrote:
I've been in several forums, and this seems to be something that has worked well in other forums, so I figured give it a shot here.

There are many things that are technically allowed on this site, that are simply not "gentlemanly" so to say. We can do these things, but it's simply rude and not something we should be proud of doing. So I think we should have a "Code of Honour", a list of things that we should and shouldn't do, even if they are technically allowed. As the title says, it would be voluntary. A set of rules we have personally agreed to with the hope of making ourselves better, and hopefully making the site better. It obviously would be faith-based, no one can get in trouble if they accidentally break their "oath" so to say (which most of us will do time to time). They can however be reminded of their promise by others.
Now I know this may not have an impact on the site much, but it's more about being able to say we aren't among the people who negatively affect the quality of discussion on the site.

I'm sure you've notice no rules have been listed. This is because rather then post my own views and asking people to agree, I would like us to discuss what would be in the code of honour, so as to ensure it follows the general consensus of those who would like to see it done.
If you don't like the code, you don't have to accept it, so don't throw a fit over it please.

Now as the guy starting this, i'll take naming rights mwahahaha. Unitary Code mwahaha. But it is important for it to have a name as that would give a title to take pride behind, rather then just a vague description. I know it sounds alot like my username, but the name actually comes from the idea that by coming together under a certain cause, we can unite to make ourselves better as a whole. By improving ourselves, we can make the group better, which in turn gives us greater opportunities to further improve ourselves, and so on.

But the reason for the name isn't important, it's the content that matters. What do you think should be included in this code? Why?

==Unitomic==

(1) Golden rule: treat others the way you would like to be treated.

(2) If you're a complete @sshole and enjoy being emotionally assaulted, then treat people the way you'd treat the woman who birthed you into this world. Or your fiancee or significant other. Or your dog. Or someone or something else you care about, like your Fleshlight.

(3) If you don't care about anything, go buy a cat. You'll have a lot in common. Maybe you'll bond. And then come back as ADOL II and tell us the stories....

(4) Be rational in all discussions.

(5) Attain at least a high school-level of understanding of basic physics, biology, chemistry, and logic. Attain at least a college reading level and understanding of politics and economics.

(6) If you are debating bluesteel, fight valiantly prior to conceding defeat.

(7) Don't drop the soap.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2014 4:36:02 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/5/2014 3:10:33 AM, bluesteel wrote:
At 12/5/2014 1:23:27 AM, Unitomic wrote:
I've been in several forums, and this seems to be something that has worked well in other forums, so I figured give it a shot here.

There are many things that are technically allowed on this site, that are simply not "gentlemanly" so to say. We can do these things, but it's simply rude and not something we should be proud of doing. So I think we should have a "Code of Honour", a list of things that we should and shouldn't do, even if they are technically allowed. As the title says, it would be voluntary. A set of rules we have personally agreed to with the hope of making ourselves better, and hopefully making the site better. It obviously would be faith-based, no one can get in trouble if they accidentally break their "oath" so to say (which most of us will do time to time). They can however be reminded of their promise by others.
Now I know this may not have an impact on the site much, but it's more about being able to say we aren't among the people who negatively affect the quality of discussion on the site.

I'm sure you've notice no rules have been listed. This is because rather then post my own views and asking people to agree, I would like us to discuss what would be in the code of honour, so as to ensure it follows the general consensus of those who would like to see it done.
If you don't like the code, you don't have to accept it, so don't throw a fit over it please.

Now as the guy starting this, i'll take naming rights mwahahaha. Unitary Code mwahaha. But it is important for it to have a name as that would give a title to take pride behind, rather then just a vague description. I know it sounds alot like my username, but the name actually comes from the idea that by coming together under a certain cause, we can unite to make ourselves better as a whole. By improving ourselves, we can make the group better, which in turn gives us greater opportunities to further improve ourselves, and so on.

But the reason for the name isn't important, it's the content that matters. What do you think should be included in this code? Why?

==Unitomic==

(1) Golden rule: treat others the way you would like to be treated.

Okay


(2) If you're a complete @sshole and enjoy being emotionally assaulted, then treat people the way you'd treat the woman who birthed you into this world. Or your fiancee or significant other. Or your dog. Or someone or something else you care about, like your Fleshlight.

I liked number 1 better.


(3) If you don't care about anything, go buy a cat. You'll have a lot in common. Maybe you'll bond. And then come back as ADOL II and tell us the stories....

(4) Be rational in all discussions.

(5) Attain at least a high school-level of understanding of basic physics, biology, chemistry, and logic. Attain at least a college reading level and understanding of politics and economics.

I dropped out in 10th grade and do fine with a 9th grade level of understanding.

(6) If you are debating bluesteel, fight valiantly prior to conceding defeat.

(7) Don't drop the soap.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2014 5:49:04 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/5/2014 4:36:02 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/5/2014 3:10:33 AM, bluesteel wrote:
At 12/5/2014 1:23:27 AM, Unitomic wrote:
I've been in several forums, and this seems to be something that has worked well in other forums, so I figured give it a shot here.

There are many things that are technically allowed on this site, that are simply not "gentlemanly" so to say. We can do these things, but it's simply rude and not something we should be proud of doing. So I think we should have a "Code of Honour", a list of things that we should and shouldn't do, even if they are technically allowed. As the title says, it would be voluntary. A set of rules we have personally agreed to with the hope of making ourselves better, and hopefully making the site better. It obviously would be faith-based, no one can get in trouble if they accidentally break their "oath" so to say (which most of us will do time to time). They can however be reminded of their promise by others.
Now I know this may not have an impact on the site much, but it's more about being able to say we aren't among the people who negatively affect the quality of discussion on the site.

I'm sure you've notice no rules have been listed. This is because rather then post my own views and asking people to agree, I would like us to discuss what would be in the code of honour, so as to ensure it follows the general consensus of those who would like to see it done.
If you don't like the code, you don't have to accept it, so don't throw a fit over it please.

Now as the guy starting this, i'll take naming rights mwahahaha. Unitary Code mwahaha. But it is important for it to have a name as that would give a title to take pride behind, rather then just a vague description. I know it sounds alot like my username, but the name actually comes from the idea that by coming together under a certain cause, we can unite to make ourselves better as a whole. By improving ourselves, we can make the group better, which in turn gives us greater opportunities to further improve ourselves, and so on.

But the reason for the name isn't important, it's the content that matters. What do you think should be included in this code? Why?

==Unitomic==

(1) Golden rule: treat others the way you would like to be treated.

Okay


(2) If you're a complete @sshole and enjoy being emotionally assaulted, then treat people the way you'd treat the woman who birthed you into this world. Or your fiancee or significant other. Or your dog. Or someone or something else you care about, like your Fleshlight.

I liked number 1 better.

twas a joke



(3) If you don't care about anything, go buy a cat. You'll have a lot in common. Maybe you'll bond. And then come back as ADOL II and tell us the stories....

(4) Be rational in all discussions.

(5) Attain at least a high school-level of understanding of basic physics, biology, chemistry, and logic. Attain at least a college reading level and understanding of politics and economics.

I dropped out in 10th grade and do fine with a 9th grade level of understanding.

Not a knock on people who didn't go to college. If you do enough reading and research to competently debate political and economic issues on this site, you've achieved a college-level understanding. College courses aren't *that* sophisticated after all.


(6) If you are debating bluesteel, fight valiantly prior to conceding defeat.

(7) Don't drop the soap.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2014 6:00:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/5/2014 5:49:04 AM, bluesteel wrote:
At 12/5/2014 4:36:02 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/5/2014 3:10:33 AM, bluesteel wrote:
At 12/5/2014 1:23:27 AM, Unitomic wrote:
I've been in several forums, and this seems to be something that has worked well in other forums, so I figured give it a shot here.

There are many things that are technically allowed on this site, that are simply not "gentlemanly" so to say. We can do these things, but it's simply rude and not something we should be proud of doing. So I think we should have a "Code of Honour", a list of things that we should and shouldn't do, even if they are technically allowed. As the title says, it would be voluntary. A set of rules we have personally agreed to with the hope of making ourselves better, and hopefully making the site better. It obviously would be faith-based, no one can get in trouble if they accidentally break their "oath" so to say (which most of us will do time to time). They can however be reminded of their promise by others.
Now I know this may not have an impact on the site much, but it's more about being able to say we aren't among the people who negatively affect the quality of discussion on the site.

I'm sure you've notice no rules have been listed. This is because rather then post my own views and asking people to agree, I would like us to discuss what would be in the code of honour, so as to ensure it follows the general consensus of those who would like to see it done.
If you don't like the code, you don't have to accept it, so don't throw a fit over it please.

Now as the guy starting this, i'll take naming rights mwahahaha. Unitary Code mwahaha. But it is important for it to have a name as that would give a title to take pride behind, rather then just a vague description. I know it sounds alot like my username, but the name actually comes from the idea that by coming together under a certain cause, we can unite to make ourselves better as a whole. By improving ourselves, we can make the group better, which in turn gives us greater opportunities to further improve ourselves, and so on.

But the reason for the name isn't important, it's the content that matters. What do you think should be included in this code? Why?

==Unitomic==

(1) Golden rule: treat others the way you would like to be treated.

Okay


(2) If you're a complete @sshole and enjoy being emotionally assaulted, then treat people the way you'd treat the woman who birthed you into this world. Or your fiancee or significant other. Or your dog. Or someone or something else you care about, like your Fleshlight.

I liked number 1 better.

twas a joke



(3) If you don't care about anything, go buy a cat. You'll have a lot in common. Maybe you'll bond. And then come back as ADOL II and tell us the stories....

(4) Be rational in all discussions.

(5) Attain at least a high school-level of understanding of basic physics, biology, chemistry, and logic. Attain at least a college reading level and understanding of politics and economics.

I dropped out in 10th grade and do fine with a 9th grade level of understanding.

Not a knock on people who didn't go to college. If you do enough reading and research to competently debate political and economic issues on this site, you've achieved a college-level understanding. College courses aren't *that* sophisticated after all.

Yeah, I know. I just try to down play my knowledge. I actually listen to professors lecture and read a lot of scholarly material all the time. It always shocks me when I have to explain certain nuances of Freudian psychology to somebody with a Bachelors degree on psychology or how a 401k works to somebody who is majoring in economics.


(6) If you are debating bluesteel, fight valiantly prior to conceding defeat.

(7) Don't drop the soap.
RevNge
Posts: 13,835
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2014 6:05:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/5/2014 1:23:27 AM, Unitomic wrote:
I've been in several forums, and this seems to be something that has worked well in other forums, so I figured give it a shot here.

There are many things that are technically allowed on this site, that are simply not "gentlemanly" so to say. We can do these things, but it's simply rude and not something we should be proud of doing. So I think we should have a "Code of Honour", a list of things that we should and shouldn't do, even if they are technically allowed. As the title says, it would be voluntary. A set of rules we have personally agreed to with the hope of making ourselves better, and hopefully making the site better. It obviously would be faith-based, no one can get in trouble if they accidentally break their "oath" so to say (which most of us will do time to time). They can however be reminded of their promise by others.
Now I know this may not have an impact on the site much, but it's more about being able to say we aren't among the people who negatively affect the quality of discussion on the site.

I'm sure you've notice no rules have been listed. This is because rather then post my own views and asking people to agree, I would like us to discuss what would be in the code of honour, so as to ensure it follows the general consensus of those who would like to see it done.
If you don't like the code, you don't have to accept it, so don't throw a fit over it please.

Now as the guy starting this, i'll take naming rights mwahahaha. Unitary Code mwahaha. But it is important for it to have a name as that would give a title to take pride behind, rather then just a vague description. I know it sounds alot like my username, but the name actually comes from the idea that by coming together under a certain cause, we can unite to make ourselves better as a whole. By improving ourselves, we can make the group better, which in turn gives us greater opportunities to further improve ourselves, and so on.

But the reason for the name isn't important, it's the content that matters. What do you think should be included in this code? Why?

==Unitomic==

The Bench is not going to like this. LOL
Unitomic
Posts: 591
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2014 4:24:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/5/2014 6:05:44 AM, RevNge wrote:
At 12/5/2014 1:23:27 AM, Unitomic wrote:
I've been in several forums, and this seems to be something that has worked well in other forums, so I figured give it a shot here.

There are many things that are technically allowed on this site, that are simply not "gentlemanly" so to say. We can do these things, but it's simply rude and not something we should be proud of doing. So I think we should have a "Code of Honour", a list of things that we should and shouldn't do, even if they are technically allowed. As the title says, it would be voluntary. A set of rules we have personally agreed to with the hope of making ourselves better, and hopefully making the site better. It obviously would be faith-based, no one can get in trouble if they accidentally break their "oath" so to say (which most of us will do time to time). They can however be reminded of their promise by others.
Now I know this may not have an impact on the site much, but it's more about being able to say we aren't among the people who negatively affect the quality of discussion on the site.

I'm sure you've notice no rules have been listed. This is because rather then post my own views and asking people to agree, I would like us to discuss what would be in the code of honour, so as to ensure it follows the general consensus of those who would like to see it done.
If you don't like the code, you don't have to accept it, so don't throw a fit over it please.

Now as the guy starting this, i'll take naming rights mwahahaha. Unitary Code mwahaha. But it is important for it to have a name as that would give a title to take pride behind, rather then just a vague description. I know it sounds alot like my username, but the name actually comes from the idea that by coming together under a certain cause, we can unite to make ourselves better as a whole. By improving ourselves, we can make the group better, which in turn gives us greater opportunities to further improve ourselves, and so on.

But the reason for the name isn't important, it's the content that matters. What do you think should be included in this code? Why?

==Unitomic==

The Bench is not going to like this. LOL

sorry didn't quote. Why won't he like it?
RevNge
Posts: 13,835
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2014 4:26:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/5/2014 4:24:14 PM, Unitomic wrote:
At 12/5/2014 6:05:44 AM, RevNge wrote:
At 12/5/2014 1:23:27 AM, Unitomic wrote:
I've been in several forums, and this seems to be something that has worked well in other forums, so I figured give it a shot here.

There are many things that are technically allowed on this site, that are simply not "gentlemanly" so to say. We can do these things, but it's simply rude and not something we should be proud of doing. So I think we should have a "Code of Honour", a list of things that we should and shouldn't do, even if they are technically allowed. As the title says, it would be voluntary. A set of rules we have personally agreed to with the hope of making ourselves better, and hopefully making the site better. It obviously would be faith-based, no one can get in trouble if they accidentally break their "oath" so to say (which most of us will do time to time). They can however be reminded of their promise by others.
Now I know this may not have an impact on the site much, but it's more about being able to say we aren't among the people who negatively affect the quality of discussion on the site.

I'm sure you've notice no rules have been listed. This is because rather then post my own views and asking people to agree, I would like us to discuss what would be in the code of honour, so as to ensure it follows the general consensus of those who would like to see it done.
If you don't like the code, you don't have to accept it, so don't throw a fit over it please.

Now as the guy starting this, i'll take naming rights mwahahaha. Unitary Code mwahaha. But it is important for it to have a name as that would give a title to take pride behind, rather then just a vague description. I know it sounds alot like my username, but the name actually comes from the idea that by coming together under a certain cause, we can unite to make ourselves better as a whole. By improving ourselves, we can make the group better, which in turn gives us greater opportunities to further improve ourselves, and so on.

But the reason for the name isn't important, it's the content that matters. What do you think should be included in this code? Why?

==Unitomic==

The Bench is not going to like this. LOL

sorry didn't quote. Why won't he like it?

If this had to be applied to him, his famous trolling would be put to an end as it's not so "gentlemanly". XD
Unitomic
Posts: 591
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2014 4:27:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/5/2014 4:26:21 PM, RevNge wrote:
At 12/5/2014 4:24:14 PM, Unitomic wrote:
At 12/5/2014 6:05:44 AM, RevNge wrote:
At 12/5/2014 1:23:27 AM, Unitomic wrote:
I've been in several forums, and this seems to be something that has worked well in other forums, so I figured give it a shot here.

There are many things that are technically allowed on this site, that are simply not "gentlemanly" so to say. We can do these things, but it's simply rude and not something we should be proud of doing. So I think we should have a "Code of Honour", a list of things that we should and shouldn't do, even if they are technically allowed. As the title says, it would be voluntary. A set of rules we have personally agreed to with the hope of making ourselves better, and hopefully making the site better. It obviously would be faith-based, no one can get in trouble if they accidentally break their "oath" so to say (which most of us will do time to time). They can however be reminded of their promise by others.
Now I know this may not have an impact on the site much, but it's more about being able to say we aren't among the people who negatively affect the quality of discussion on the site.

I'm sure you've notice no rules have been listed. This is because rather then post my own views and asking people to agree, I would like us to discuss what would be in the code of honour, so as to ensure it follows the general consensus of those who would like to see it done.
If you don't like the code, you don't have to accept it, so don't throw a fit over it please.

Now as the guy starting this, i'll take naming rights mwahahaha. Unitary Code mwahaha. But it is important for it to have a name as that would give a title to take pride behind, rather then just a vague description. I know it sounds alot like my username, but the name actually comes from the idea that by coming together under a certain cause, we can unite to make ourselves better as a whole. By improving ourselves, we can make the group better, which in turn gives us greater opportunities to further improve ourselves, and so on.

But the reason for the name isn't important, it's the content that matters. What do you think should be included in this code? Why?

==Unitomic==

The Bench is not going to like this. LOL

sorry didn't quote. Why won't he like it?

If this had to be applied to him, his famous trolling would be put to an end as it's not so "gentlemanly". XD

ahh well luckily he doesn't have to join :)
Unitomic
Posts: 591
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 9:09:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I can think of a few things to put in

1: If you're comment derails, or risks derailing, a thread, you are responsible for creating a new thread for that comment so as to not derail the first thread.

2: If you call fallacy, you must explain why it's a fallacy. We shouldn't be forced to try to figure out what is fallacious about it, especially since we may find it to not be fallacious at all.

3: Never insult. Never denounce someone without confronting their arguments. If you are right, you can prove it. Simply waving away the need to respond of grounds like "It's just him" or "I hardly have to explain whats wrong here" may be more a sign of your positions faults then of his. Don't do it.

4: Do not assume that no response is a surrender. It's very easy to fall into that mentality. But often times people don't respond because they are busy, or because (and this does happen), they forget they even commented on the thread, and didn't notice a response was among the notifications (especially since you can have 4 PMs yet 6 notifications due to two PM's having two responces on them)

I'll post more thoughts later. For now, your opinions?
Cermank
Posts: 3,773
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2014 3:02:52 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/5/2014 1:23:27 AM, Unitomic wrote:
I've been in several forums, and this seems to be something that has worked well in other forums, so I figured give it a shot here.

There are many things that are technically allowed on this site, that are simply not "gentlemanly" so to say.

that's sexist, you know.
Unitomic
Posts: 591
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2014 3:04:23 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/8/2014 3:02:52 AM, Cermank wrote:
At 12/5/2014 1:23:27 AM, Unitomic wrote:
I've been in several forums, and this seems to be something that has worked well in other forums, so I figured give it a shot here.

There are many things that are technically allowed on this site, that are simply not "gentlemanly" so to say.

that's sexist, you know.

let me rephrase then. Agressimanly
Cermank
Posts: 3,773
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2014 3:17:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/8/2014 3:04:23 AM, Unitomic wrote:
At 12/8/2014 3:02:52 AM, Cermank wrote:
At 12/5/2014 1:23:27 AM, Unitomic wrote:
I've been in several forums, and this seems to be something that has worked well in other forums, so I figured give it a shot here.

There are many things that are technically allowed on this site, that are simply not "gentlemanly" so to say.

that's sexist, you know.

let me rephrase then. Agressimanly

<3
Unitomic
Posts: 591
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 5:14:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Oh perhaps "do not accept or issue abortion debates". Let's be honest, this site doesn't offer fair votes on them.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 5:36:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Why would we need such a thing? I'm inclined to think that, for those already predisposed toward the kinds of behaviors which might herein be included, such an explicit "code" hardly seems necessary. If anything, rather than elaborating a list of precepts, I think we would be far better served by pointing to members who behave in an exemplary fashion, or who, in other words, instantiate and bear out a general principle which, nevertheless, cannot be formulated a priori. It's the very same kind of distinction between the Law of the Old Testament and its fulfillment and inoperativity in the living exemplarity of Christ.
Raisor
Posts: 4,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 5:44:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/9/2014 5:36:17 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Why would we need such a thing? I'm inclined to think that, for those already predisposed toward the kinds of behaviors which might herein be included, such an explicit "code" hardly seems necessary. If anything, rather than elaborating a list of precepts, I think we would be far better served by pointing to members who behave in an exemplary fashion, or who, in other words, instantiate and bear out a general principle which, nevertheless, cannot be formulated a priori. It's the very same kind of distinction between the Law of the Old Testament and its fulfillment and inoperativity in the living exemplarity of Christ.

There have been studies that show that simply signing or agreeing to an honor code make people more likely to behave in accordance with it.

Anyways establishing community Norms changes behavior.
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 6:07:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/5/2014 3:10:33 AM, bluesteel wrote:

(1) Golden rule: treat others the way you would like to be treated.

(2) If you're a complete @sshole and enjoy being emotionally assaulted, then treat people the way you'd treat the woman who birthed you into this world. Or your fiancee or significant other. Or your dog. Or someone or something else you care about, like your Fleshlight.

(3) If you don't care about anything, go buy a cat. You'll have a lot in common. Maybe you'll bond. And then come back as ADOL II and tell us the stories....

(4) Be rational in all discussions.

(5) Attain at least a high school-level of understanding of basic physics, biology, chemistry, and logic. Attain at least a college reading level and understanding of politics and economics.

(6) If you are debating bluesteel, fight valiantly prior to conceding defeat.

(7) Don't drop the soap.

Approved. Let's make it a stickied thread in the main forum.
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 6:10:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/9/2014 6:07:46 PM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 12/5/2014 3:10:33 AM, bluesteel wrote:

(1) Golden rule: treat others the way you would like to be treated.

(2) If you're a complete @sshole and enjoy being emotionally assaulted, then treat people the way you'd treat the woman who birthed you into this world. Or your fiancee or significant other. Or your dog. Or someone or something else you care about, like your Fleshlight.

(3) If you don't care about anything, go buy a cat. You'll have a lot in common. Maybe you'll bond. And then come back as ADOL II and tell us the stories....

(4) Be rational in all discussions.

(5) Attain at least a high school-level of understanding of basic physics, biology, chemistry, and logic. Attain at least a college reading level and understanding of politics and economics.

(6) If you are debating bluesteel, fight valiantly prior to conceding defeat.

(7) Don't drop the soap.

Approved. Let's make it a stickied thread in the main forum.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 6:12:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/9/2014 5:44:20 PM, Raisor wrote:
At 12/9/2014 5:36:17 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Why would we need such a thing? I'm inclined to think that, for those already predisposed toward the kinds of behaviors which might herein be included, such an explicit "code" hardly seems necessary. If anything, rather than elaborating a list of precepts, I think we would be far better served by pointing to members who behave in an exemplary fashion, or who, in other words, instantiate and bear out a general principle which, nevertheless, cannot be formulated a priori. It's the very same kind of distinction between the Law of the Old Testament and its fulfillment and inoperativity in the living exemplarity of Christ.

There have been studies that show that simply signing or agreeing to an honor code make people more likely to behave in accordance with it.

Anyways establishing community Norms changes behavior.

I see not downfalls... So there really isn't reason not to, even if only we follow it. Besides, this site needs a code of law to look to, even if following it is optional. If it betters just one person, it's done more good than bad.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 6:17:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/9/2014 5:44:20 PM, Raisor wrote:
At 12/9/2014 5:36:17 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Why would we need such a thing? I'm inclined to think that, for those already predisposed toward the kinds of behaviors which might herein be included, such an explicit "code" hardly seems necessary. If anything, rather than elaborating a list of precepts, I think we would be far better served by pointing to members who behave in an exemplary fashion, or who, in other words, instantiate and bear out a general principle which, nevertheless, cannot be formulated a priori. It's the very same kind of distinction between the Law of the Old Testament and its fulfillment and inoperativity in the living exemplarity of Christ.

There have been studies that show that simply signing or agreeing to an honor code make people more likely to behave in accordance with it.

There are a great many studies, many with conflicting results, others with inconclusive results, and others still the methodologies of which are sufficiently questionable as to cast considerable doubt on the reliability or quantifiable impact of their results. If you have these studies at the ready, I would like very much to have a look at them.

Anyways establishing community Norms changes behavior.

Whose behavior will it change, in which respects, and to what extent? If the best you can do is make existence theorem claims about conjectured effects, it's only a step above being blind so far as I'm concerned.
Unitomic
Posts: 591
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 6:21:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/9/2014 6:12:13 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 12/9/2014 5:44:20 PM, Raisor wrote:
At 12/9/2014 5:36:17 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Why would we need such a thing? I'm inclined to think that, for those already predisposed toward the kinds of behaviors which might herein be included, such an explicit "code" hardly seems necessary. If anything, rather than elaborating a list of precepts, I think we would be far better served by pointing to members who behave in an exemplary fashion, or who, in other words, instantiate and bear out a general principle which, nevertheless, cannot be formulated a priori. It's the very same kind of distinction between the Law of the Old Testament and its fulfillment and inoperativity in the living exemplarity of Christ.

There have been studies that show that simply signing or agreeing to an honor code make people more likely to behave in accordance with it.

Anyways establishing community Norms changes behavior.

I see not downfalls... So there really isn't reason not to, even if only we follow it. Besides, this site needs a code of law to look to, even if following it is optional. If it betters just one person, it's done more good than bad.

True. And it isn't a law of the land. If you don't want apart of it, don't sign it. It's a waste of everyones time having someone whine about it. Just don't sign it. But don't try to talk out an idea others may want to sign onto. You won't be banned for breaking a part of the code you didn't sign (nor will you get in trouble if you did sign it and broke it. It's Faith Based.)
sadolite
Posts: 8,839
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 6:25:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
A "Code of Honour" on DDO? Pfff get real. There is currently a Presidential election platform to lobby Juggle to allow other people to be berated and insulted. Bwahahahahahah
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 6:27:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/9/2014 6:25:27 PM, sadolite wrote:
A "Code of Honour" on DDO? Pfff get real. There is currently a Presidential election platform to lobby Juggle to allow other people to be berated and insulted. Bwahahahahahah

Seems like the perfect time to set up a voluntary code, then. lol
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 6:28:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/9/2014 6:12:13 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 12/9/2014 5:44:20 PM, Raisor wrote:
At 12/9/2014 5:36:17 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Why would we need such a thing? I'm inclined to think that, for those already predisposed toward the kinds of behaviors which might herein be included, such an explicit "code" hardly seems necessary. If anything, rather than elaborating a list of precepts, I think we would be far better served by pointing to members who behave in an exemplary fashion, or who, in other words, instantiate and bear out a general principle which, nevertheless, cannot be formulated a priori. It's the very same kind of distinction between the Law of the Old Testament and its fulfillment and inoperativity in the living exemplarity of Christ.

There have been studies that show that simply signing or agreeing to an honor code make people more likely to behave in accordance with it.

Anyways establishing community Norms changes behavior.

I see not downfalls... So there really isn't reason not to, even if only we follow it.

"It has no egregious disadvantages" is both a defensive argument and non-unique to the proposal. You could make such an argument for plenty of time-wasting proposals, and, even if we accept these claims each time without question, they never constitute a positive argument for adoption.

Besides, this site needs a code of law to look to, even if following it is optional. If it betters just one person, it's done more good than bad.

It's not much of a code of law, or a terribly effective one, if the people most inclined to sign it are those who already exemplify its intentions. Its only remaining value is symbolic, which is tantamount to signing a toothless international treaty to propogate the illusion of being proactive.

I am also very skeptical of the "just one person need benefit" approach. There is almost no other realm of argument in which such a line of reasoning is dignified, and I have no reason to believe this is an exception.
sadolite
Posts: 8,839
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 6:29:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/9/2014 6:27:40 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 12/9/2014 6:25:27 PM, sadolite wrote:
A "Code of Honour" on DDO? Pfff get real. There is currently a Presidential election platform to lobby Juggle to allow other people to be berated and insulted. Bwahahahahahah

Seems like the perfect time to set up a voluntary code, then. lol

well good luck with that, I'll be civil if you are.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 6:35:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/9/2014 6:21:00 PM, Unitomic wrote:
At 12/9/2014 6:12:13 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 12/9/2014 5:44:20 PM, Raisor wrote:
There have been studies that show that simply signing or agreeing to an honor code make people more likely to behave in accordance with it.

Anyways establishing community Norms changes behavior.

I see not downfalls... So there really isn't reason not to, even if only we follow it. Besides, this site needs a code of law to look to, even if following it is optional. If it betters just one person, it's done more good than bad.

True. And it isn't a law of the land. If you don't want apart of it, don't sign it. It's a waste of everyones time having someone whine about it. Just don't sign it. But don't try to talk out an idea others may want to sign onto. You won't be banned for breaking a part of the code you didn't sign (nor will you get in trouble if you did sign it and broke it. It's Faith Based.)

First of all, I'm not whining. I have no serious emotional stake in this proposal. Second of all, to the extent that it's predicated on an honor system in a digital world with no explicit ramifications for breaking it, it serves literally no other purpose than a vacuous back-patting exercise for people who want to feign gentility by signing a meaningless agreement. Similar to formal oaths in political office, this seems purely ceremonial and, consequently, implicitly disingenuous.