As I should not have attempted to address the concerns in the halloween thread, this thread may or may not be a better venue.
I have no doubt that whatever I bring up will seem hypocritical. For whatever reason, older members of the forum can get away with some of these things. I don't think its intentional bias, but we do get a little more slack IF WE"RE CAREFUL.
Please consider this as my take on how I avoid trouble on EN World. The post examples I might make would be perfectly fine somewhere else. I do better when I follow them, than when I don't.
A lot of the risky subjects is religion and politics. Once a post smells like a jab at one of these, your chance of getting a warning go up.
Personally, I avoid words like liberal or conservative as most people recognize them as substitutes for political parties, which tends to get into politics. there's almost no need to ever say 'only a liberal/conservative would think that" or anything in that vein.
Calling things by the proper name instead of slang is also a good idea. I can't say Jap when talking about the bombing of Pearl Harbor. I need to spell it out, to afford the proper respect as somebody else may take offense. hence why I might think using "guberment" is a slight against the governmental body it was substituted in for. this might seem trivial, but somebody asked me to stop using the term Wallet Rape on here, and I did, even though I didn't like it.
It's also bad form around here to argue with the red or orange text of a Mod. they use those colors to signify they are Moddding, and not discussing. It's equally bad for somebody after that to keep jabbing at the Moddee. So if the Mod tells you to stop cheesing, it's bad for for me to chime in afterward about how bad you are for cheesing.
Best practice after recieving a mod post is to post an apology (and try not to explain your previous reasoning, that never works well), or to resume discussion of the original topic under new behavior. Posting any kind of laughter message after getting a mod implies you don't respect the warning or that you're posts that others took seriously were really a joke you were playing. That's trolling, and it's not good to look like that.
Another rule of thumb is to leave bad arguments in their respective threads. I can disagree strongly with Umbran in one thread, while agreeing with him in another. Treat each thread (as best you can) like Las Vegas. that gets hard at times, especially when one thread seems related to another. If you've only got a negative point to bring in from the other thread, leave it behind or you'll bring the bad taste with it.
In an oppositional argument, try to acknowledge a valid point the other side makes. EN World is not debate team. There's no score. There's more honor in saying "while I still favor my position, you do raise a valid point in XYZ." Nobody's ideas or values are perfect. We all have our little hypocrisies like hating messy sandwiches but liking sloppy joes. To recognize the other side's point as significant shows that you are listening and considering new information, which on EN World is the better goal of having discussions about tricky topics.
Avoid demonstrating Oppositional Defiance behavior. Posting in absolute opposition to somebody's well reasoned position makes discussion feel like a troll thread or arguing with a mad man. Now I suppose in any argument, well reasoned or not is in the eye of the beholder. And this is in the crux of why we avoid politics, because people polarize and just can't accept the other side. It's a trap, so if you can detect you've fallen into it (one side or the other, backout respectfully).
Recognize expertise when it appears. We have subject matter experts on here. We have know-it-alls who actually do know a lot (I am one, but Umbran always knows more than me). Everybody knows stuff, but experts really do know more. Once an expert starts spouting their technobabble in the correct syntax, stop arguing with them about the quality of their facts. It just ain't worth it, and honestly, they are usually right. And by correct syntax, I mean they are talking like an expert in that subject would talk. Once Danny the lawyer starts talking like a lawyer, assume what he's saying is correct enough for forum discussion purposes and move on to other points. I know it can feel like losing a few ego points as if you're giving in to them, but the reality is an expert knows his material better, and the point should be learning what they know to shape your future dealings, not arguing them down.
Be prepared to lose the argument or change your mind. I know I've seen somebody get mad that "I moved the goalposts", but the reality is, if somebody raises a reasonable number of valid points against my proposed viewpoint, I'm willing to change my mind. My thread track record in here is chock full of "prove this idea is wrong" threads and I think I "lost" every one of them. If all parties are so insistent that they need to convince the other, then nobody's actually going to change. That pretty much makes discussion or raising points a useless activity. I can't make you listen and change your mind, but I can accept some valid point of yours into your world view.
Another danger vector is Sarcasm. it translates poorly into written text. Even with the smilies. Kind of like using the preface of "No offense, but" as it always leads to something offensive. there's probably some people with the skill to use them at the right time, but for the majority, I'd steer clear as they don't add clarity to a post, given they inherently have a meaning different than the words used.
That's a lot of words. If they are helpful, great. If you think I'm picking on you, I apologize as that was not my intent. If you think some other people don't follow them, well that's on them, not you.
