Board Thread:Suggestions/@comment-10072715-20130526022532/@comment-4295646-20130529020331

Oh, have we reopened this discussion? Okay. Well, here's my reasoning for

 1. It doesn't make sense to restrict mature content - and by this I mean intellectually mature: complicated, nuanced, controversial - to articles and deny it to chat. Chat is member-exclusive, where the minimum age rule is actually enforced; by contrast, even nonmembers (of any age, I'll remind you) can access our story content. Being part of a horror wiki, said content is often horrifyingly graphic. Reference "Voices".

In terms of religion specifically, some other stories are religiously profane. Reference "An Egg". This story intentionally (and respectfully) subverts or denies the doctrines of several major religions. And not only do we permit it on the site - we love it! It's often recommended to new users looking for something different.

There is no categorical basis for differentiating chat content and article content. People should already be aware that they might view potentially offensive content somewhere on the site, because - again - this is a Goddamn horror wiki! I'm not saying you're spineless if you get offended because your beliefs are questioned, but I do think it's your responsibility to ask to be left alone. After that, further direct questioning can be fairly considered harassment.

''' 2. Offense and controversy. ''' It's fine to adopt a zero-tolerance policy about overreactions, trolling, and bullying. In fact, if there is any occasion where one or several users are persistently and offensively harassing someone else, I would expect you to shut that shit down quick.

But the reason you are charged with doing that is because your job is to facilitate free, fun discussion of things people want to talk about. Boil down the function of a chat room, and that is the absolute limit. By preventing me from casually asking where people stand on the issue of a god or gods, and not trusting me to do so in a respectful, adult way, you treat both asker and askees like children.

You want to crack down on disrespect, go for it! But do it on a case-by-case basis like you signed up to do. Don't wall off entire areas of conversation because you can't be arsed to promote civility. Your duty is to make users more free, not less. Punish the ones who actually start shit and go out of their way to anger people. Don't be the border guards who turn EVERYONE away because some of them might not have visas.

3. Value of religious talk. When you shuffle people into a room and let them talk, eventually they're going to talk about how the world appears to each of them. A person's individual theology is one of the most central pillars of their worldview, because it affects absolutely everything: their foundation of morals, their grounds for belief (all belief, not just religious faith), their enjoyment of particular cultures and narratives.

Can allowing this sort of discussion create bad blood? Of course it can. Because it's important. Because people care about it. I feel that, by restricting conversation exclusively to banal, superficial topics (which we always come back to anyway, and that's my next point), you imply that the deep, enlightening stuff isn't worth discussing in main chat. And it is, because it needs a variety of inputs and perspectives that you can't often get one-on-one.

4. Who's to say religious talk will even increase if you allow it? It's not like I'm constantly champing at the bit to bring up eschatology, any more than most of you walk around dying to attend city council meetings or look up water safety protocols. You have that right and barely use it. But having the right, for when you need it, is what's so very vital. By the way, let's look at the word "cunt", the focus of a recent and similar debate. Aside from the day or so after it was declared okay, I haven't seen people throwing it around willy-nilly at all.

Don't go "tl;dr", mods. It's your job to listen.