This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Well, this should end a lot of arguments.

#41WelshGamer82Posted 5/1/2013 10:59:49 AM
Religious beliefs are never supernatural.

There. I think between the three of us, we have all bases covered.
#42GuideToTheDarkPosted 5/1/2013 12:33:08 PM
Beliefs in the supernatural are not, themselves, supernatural.

Although if the mod said this, he'd obviously be being facetious.
---
Before all else you must build muscle. Then you must become hero to children everywhere.
#43Julian_CaesarPosted 5/1/2013 8:37:19 PM
From: squareandrare | #006
Mockery of those who don't believe the same thing that you do will not be tolerated. Don't refer to their beliefs as "supernatural". You're only doing it to be an ass, anyway.


Well....that happens every day on this board. While I somewhat understand the mod's point (i.e. the difference between disparaging beliefs and disparaging God/deity), I agree that he/she probably didn't realize the full context. Plus like kozlo said, we do a good job of self-regulating.
---
Every day the rest of your life is changed forever.
#44Julian_CaesarPosted 5/1/2013 8:38:43 PM
From: GuideToTheDark | #042
Beliefs in the supernatural are not, themselves, supernatural.

Although if the mod said this, he'd obviously be being facetious.


How so? It's not impossible to think that the mods policing the Religion board have a better-than-average understanding of the difference between disparaging and deity and disparaging someone's belief.
---
Every day the rest of your life is changed forever.
#45GuideToTheDarkPosted 5/1/2013 8:57:49 PM
You said it yourself, the mod probably didn't realize the full context. Maybe it's just me, but the quote doesn't read like he meant to make a specific distinction.
---
Before all else you must build muscle. Then you must become hero to children everywhere.
#46AynRandySavagePosted 5/2/2013 1:16:37 PM
Seriously mods, bring it.
#47black spiderPosted 5/2/2013 5:47:29 PM
Julian_Caesar posted...
It's not impossible to think that the mods policing the Religion board have a better-than-average understanding of the difference between disparaging and deity and disparaging someone's belief.


I don't think there's actually any particular moderator that polices this board. GFAQs has too many boards for each to be assigned to a specific moderator, which means the core system has to rely on a different mechanic. They might have a short exception list but I don't see why Religion would be on that list. It's not sufficiently active to be worth it and let's face it, neither religious nor political debate here at the site has any sort of priority. It's a small niche that is barely tolerated but certainly not done any favors.

As for the general mechanic, I believe reported messages go into a bigass pile of filth that mods work their way through at their leisure. Then they f*** up big time with disturbing regularity because they never have any clue about the context, you appeal because they're being moronic, and then a second mod takes a look-see. Of course he's also missing the context, but at least the second mod usually has the courtesy to to write something slightly less idiotic than "You know why I deleted your post!", even if he's no less reading challenged than the first mod.

At this point you may as well quite while you're not too far behind, but if you kick the whole thing upwards, your moderation is reviewed by a lead mod, which does f*** all good most of the time, since they also don't have the time or the inclination to bother with the context. Then it goes to admin and since there's no appealing or even replying to his decision, the admin really doesn't have to give a damn. And he doesn't, as Square's quote shows.

The reason why moderators on other sites can do their job without being quite as unpopular as GFAQs mods is because they're not anonymous dickheads who snipe at you from behind impenetrable cover. They frequent the boards, they occasionally have a clue what the hell they're talking about, and you can in fact talk with them. They act more or less like human beings rather than a bastard child between a robot with Win ME and a lawyer.

Oh, and since we're playing dare: Religious beliefs themselves are not supernatural, in the sense that even believing in crazy s*** (like GFAQs moderators thinking they're doing anything but a terrible job) is a natural phenomenon, but the religion itself will almost always include some supernatural fluff to give it authority, which is then combined with some "objectively right" moral teachings. In short, religions are (often) based on supernatural stuff and religious beliefs therefore (often) require belief in the supernatural.

In ultra-short: Take away the fairy tale magic and the gods vanish.
---
You want to try your hand at proving why genocide is inherently bad? - OrangeWizard
#48OrangeWizardPosted 5/2/2013 6:03:35 PM(edited)
From: black spider | #045
In ultra-short: Take away the fairy tale magic and the gods vanish.


Take away Tinkerbell's fairydust and she'll fall to her death or be eaten by a mouse. Duh. What do you expect to happen?
---
Trolling and making valid arguments are not mutually exclusive
#49Julian_CaesarPosted 5/2/2013 7:47:38 PM
From: black spider | #047
Religious beliefs themselves are not supernatural


Let's.....just focus on the positively reinforcing part of your post. I think everyone can agree on this nice, civil statement.
---
Every day the rest of your life is changed forever.
#50Orwellian_ShadoPosted 5/2/2013 8:15:48 PM
But square didn't say religious beliefs themselves are supernatural. He said religious fundamentalism involves an belief in the supernatural. He didn't call religious beliefs unsubstantiated either. He said that belief in the supernatural is unsubstantiated. The mods misinterpreted his post.