Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

Bill White · 2003-03-20 21:44:32

I am as guilty as anyone of discussing Iraq, Iran, North Korea, and the like in the Free Chat section. Certainly more guilty than most members here.

However, I now feel such discussions may needlessly distract from the purpose of NewMars. Perhaps we (Adrian?) should consider consider a ban on topics like the Iraq war, whether we like/dislike President Bush, et. al. If NewMars were the only forum available for such discussion then a ban would be inappropriate however the internet is chock full of discussion sites where we can all yell about Iraq to our hearts content. And have zero chance of having any real impact.

Whatever Adrian decides, I am tempted to adopt a personal blackout on current affairs, politics and war unless there is a direct and immediate connection to getting to Mars, which is supposedly why we are here. I know I will be sorely tempted to break my resolution and therefore ask the help of serious Mars folk to remind me to "shut up" if I stray.

Any thoughts?

Josh Cryer · 2003-03-20 22:46:55

Tell you what, I agree with you here. I don't think banning is necessary, though.

I'll make a promise to simply stop responding to (or creating) any Iraq (or, hell, Bush) discussion. Especially since I find myself going into circles at times, and it's fairly frustrating.

I don't think you're really that guilty for the offtopic political discussion, though. You may start a thread, but I sometimes manage to keep it going for quite a few pages.

Josh Cryer · 2003-03-20 22:51:35

And, heh, wouldn't you know it, momments after that post, I came up with the most incredible metaphor about international law. And you guys know how I am about metaphors or scenarios, so you gotta know I'm sincere here with my promise to shut up.

Shaun Barrett · 2003-03-21 07:13:38

It's interesting to hear people coming around to the idea that endless passionate arguments about politics are probably best avoided.
I can't remember a case of anybody having had their opinion altered by a heated political exchange - at least not in any of the discussions I've participated in during the last 30+ years! Only the most mature and intellectually disciplined people can avoid becoming emotional during these exchanges. When you become emotional, your capacity to evaluate information and modify your opinion rationally is fatally impaired. The end result is usually a rapidly escalating war of insults born of exasperation.
It's been happening in just this way at New Mars in most of the politically inclined threads and some of the results would be comical if they weren't so childish.

A self-imposed or officially sanctioned ban on political comments probably wouldn't be necessary if people simply worked out when to shutup! Most of us are interested to hear where others stand on certain issues and are usually keen to put our own point across too. To my way of thinking though, there can come a point when it's obvious you're dealing with someone of a totally different mindset. Such a mindset has most likely been built up over just as many years as it took you to build up yours - maybe longer! You're not going to change it in a few hours of petty squabbling on the net.
It's a difficult challenge but, if we learn to control ourselves in a civilised manner, there should be nowhere we can't allow our conversations to go - as long as we learn when to simply agree to differ, and move on to something more productive.

Palomar · 2003-03-21 07:37:15

It's interesting to hear people coming around to the idea that endless passionate arguments about politics are probably best avoided.
I can't remember a case of anybody having had their opinion altered by a heated political exchange - at least not in any of the discussions I've participated in during the last 30+ years! Only the most mature and intellectually disciplined people can avoid becoming emotional during these exchanges. When you become emotional, your capacity to evaluate information and modify your opinion rationally is fatally impaired. The end result is usually a rapidly escalating war of insults born of exasperation.
It's been happening in just this way at New Mars in most of the politically inclined threads and some of the results would be comical if they weren't so childish.
A self-imposed or officially sanctioned ban on political comments probably wouldn't be necessary if people simply worked out when to shutup! Most of us are interested to hear where others stand on certain issues and are usually keen to put our own point across too. To my way of thinking though, there can come a point when it's obvious you're dealing with someone of a totally different mindset. Such a mindset has most likely been built up over just as many years as it took you to build up yours - maybe longer! You're not going to change it in a few hours of petty squabbling on the net.
It's a difficult challenge but, if we learn to control ourselves in a civilised manner, there should be nowhere we can't allow our conversations to go - as long as we learn when to simply agree to differ, and move on to something more productive.

*Applause!! Very well put, Shaun. I agree with every point you make. Your mature, polished and highly diplomatic approach to debates and contrary viewpoints is something I've watched and learned from, and am trying to put into practice (not always easy, I admit).

And yes...it's good to know how to moderate one's own self (not always an easy matter either).

--Cindy

Shaun Barrett · 2003-03-21 08:10:37

Awww, shucks Ma'am ... you know I'm just a fool for compliment from a young lady!!

Josh Cryer · 2003-03-21 08:34:56

The problem with political debates is that if one side is wrong, their information is not factual or their approach is disingenous. If we were talking about religion or something we could shrug it off as ideological like you're suggesting here, but when it comes to politics we can't approach it that way (I'm not saying that in practice politics aren't ideological, I'm saying that arguing in any case can be done with factual information). Sure, there's a point when you do give up trying to show someone simple facts, but if someone extended their time and effort doing so, I wouldn't consider it childish. Childish is throwing out any reasonable discussion and turning it into unreasaonble, unsubstantiated, shouts of ?I was right you are wrong.?

We have 839+ posts of non-Mars related political discussion, and only a little over a thousand Mars related political discussion (rough guess about the former). I think this helps substantiate a self-imposed ban on non-Mars related political discussion (no one ever suggested a ban, self-imposed or otherwise, on Mars related political [/philosophical] discussion). It's almost like being on a space rocket forum and having a good portion of your topics being about military rockets. It completely detractes from the common topic.

dicktice · 2003-03-21 09:14:38

Bravo! While the word "ban" has a bad connotation (as in banned books), Mars topics should be nurtured, at least until they "catch fire" the way that other (banned) topic always seems to do!

Cobra Commander · 2003-03-21 12:10:37

Ah, but how many times can we violate the ban before there are consequences?

Bill White · 2003-03-21 12:20:00

Ah, but how many times can we violate the ban before there are consequences?

Bada bing! Bada boom!

clark · 2003-03-21 13:18:49

I agree, everyone should shut up about this stuff.

It will make it much easier for everyone to finally hear me...

All people, whatever your view, let us hope that the loss of life is small, and that the future is made better for all.

Adrian · 2003-03-21 14:05:57

I've thought about this for a bit. I'm not about to ban discussion on Iraq; I think it's bound to creep into other discussions and I would rather it be confined to Free Chat. That said, I certainly don't advocate it, and as you have all said, these are Mars forums first and foremost.

So: I will discourage discussion on war and Iraq, but I will not ban it.

CalTech2010 · 2003-03-22 13:43:09

You know, this is a Mars site, but it is filled with Mars enthusiasts. If you try to debate politics on a politics site, you end up arguing with people who are of many different affiliations (which is probably a good thing).

The thing I like about the NewMars forum is that it's a big room full of people who care about one thing: Mars. You can still talk about Beck's new CD at a StarTrek convention, right? You just get a different spin than if you were at a Beck FanClub convention, or an engineering conference, or the water cooler at work.

Yes, the focus should be talking about Mars, but let's not restrict ourselves to just that realm.

George H · 2003-03-22 14:33:00

Yes, the focus should be talking about Mars, but let's not restrict ourselves to just that realm.

Oh, ha ha ha. When's the last time you posted ANYTHING about Mars? You only exist here to talk politics & music, stuff like that. Mostly politics. You care about Mars? Heh, prove it.

CalTech2010 · 2003-03-22 15:37:26

Maybe if most of this talk was about realistic problems that we as citizens can solve, like securing funding through our politicians, then maybe I would post more.

Right now, I don't really see the purpose in hypothesizing about what the roofs of the nurseries should be made of or what the best launch method is, when really the people who should be asking that are NASA engineers.

Shut up, baby...

Adrian · 2003-03-22 15:51:19

CalTech: If you aren't interested in talking about Mars, why exactly are you here? If it's all just idle and useless speculation to you, I think you'd have a better time and find a more appreciative audience at some other forum. I wouldn't mind so much if you actually made useful discussion here, but lately it seems that you're more interested in irritating people and telling them to 'shut up'. People tend not to like that.

Consider this to be a first warning for you to improve your behaviour.

CalTech2010 · 2003-03-23 20:06:06

Fine. I'll spend my time in real studies from now on instead of speculating about things I cannot possibly influence. I'm tired of these flamewars and crack-pot small-town politics. I'll go debate on a political forum and leave you all. I came here originally to seek the advice of some more-knowledgeable people about a Mars science project. I got sucked into political debate and forgot what this Mars forum was about. It still blows my mind when I think of all the theoretical things that people speculate on here, whether it is Martian currency or habitat structure, and most people here never have and never will work on the Mars program.

I'll leave you guys to your peace, but I'll study my engineering textbooks and actually apply and affect this program someday.

I said "shut up" twice. It was warranted; George H is a loser that harrasses people constantly and doesn't add to the discussion, either. I know clark and Cindy got into it with him on the "80s music" thing.

I'll write my congressmen about Mars funding, and I'll keep studying. So long...

Josh Cryer · 2003-03-23 23:20:41

Hey, now that's an idea!

Let's ban anyone who delves into using the stereotypical wildcard that people use when they never really gave a crap in the first place! ?This is all fantasy and thus it's irrelevant.?

Not that I'm serious, but that's one of the more annoying behaviors out there.

No need to write your congressmen, though, it's not like scientific or exploratory interest in space is very high in the American public.

Palomar · 2003-03-24 08:23:54

George H is a loser that harrasses people constantly and doesn't add to the discussion, either. I know clark and Cindy got into it with him on the "80s music" thing.

*Um, no...George H and I have never "got into it" about anything. In the "80s music" thread George expressed some ire toward Clark (if I recall correctly). Clark seemed to express some disdain regarding my memory capabilities. I questioned Clark as to why my musical preferences seemed to bother him. That's all. No problems with George H on my end of things.

Just wanted to set the record straight (trite as it is). Now back to the more important stuff...

--Cindy

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2003-03-20 21:44:32

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#2 2003-03-20 22:46:55

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#3 2003-03-20 22:51:35

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#4 2003-03-21 07:13:38

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#5 2003-03-21 07:37:15

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#6 2003-03-21 08:10:37

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#7 2003-03-21 08:34:56

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#8 2003-03-21 09:14:38

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#9 2003-03-21 12:10:37

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#10 2003-03-21 12:20:00

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#11 2003-03-21 13:18:49

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#12 2003-03-21 14:05:57

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#13 2003-03-22 13:43:09

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#14 2003-03-22 14:33:00

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#15 2003-03-22 15:37:26

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#16 2003-03-22 15:51:19

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#17 2003-03-23 20:06:06

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#18 2003-03-23 23:20:41

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

#19 2003-03-24 08:23:54

Re: Ban Iraq discussion? - A suggestion from a guilty party

Board footer