Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 794752" data-attributes="member: 177">Is it really enough of a detraction to be noticible?&nbsp; Have you seen flamewars?&nbsp; How many instances of clear detraction can we cite, outside of this thread?If there is detraction, it is &quot;below the radar&quot;.&nbsp; Policing on the basis of trying to stop effects we cannot clearly see is perhaps a bad idea.&nbsp; &nbsp;Matters of overall policy should perhaps be based more upon evidence than humble opinions.&nbsp; We are a community of bascially mature people, who are generally quite capable of speaking for themselves.&nbsp; If said minorities wish, they can tell the mods directly.&nbsp; If/when such complaints show a significant effect, then I'd expect the mods to change the policy, and not before.Probably true, at least in part.&nbsp; But, your argument against the flags is much the same - avoid offending minorities who might feel pressured or oppressed.&nbsp; Either way, it's a matter of trying to satisfy people's sensibilities.&nbsp; The rules have always been a balancing act - balancing the offense of some at being restricted against the offense others take at certain statements.&nbsp; More a matter of practicality than idealism.So, until it is shown that some pretty hefty offense is being caused by the flags, it does not behoove the mods to restrict them.&nbsp; So far as we can see, they are likely to get more, and louder, and more disruptive offense from resticting them than their presence causes.&nbsp; Simply put - It may be nicely idealistic to restict the flags, but it will serve nobody if doing so starts flames.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 794752, member: 177"] Is it really enough of a detraction to be noticible? Have you seen flamewars? How many instances of clear detraction can we cite, outside of this thread? If there is detraction, it is "below the radar". Policing on the basis of trying to stop effects we cannot clearly see is perhaps a bad idea. Matters of overall policy should perhaps be based more upon evidence than humble opinions. We are a community of bascially mature people, who are generally quite capable of speaking for themselves. If said minorities wish, they can tell the mods directly. If/when such complaints show a significant effect, then I'd expect the mods to change the policy, and not before. Probably true, at least in part. But, your argument against the flags is much the same - avoid offending minorities who might feel pressured or oppressed. Either way, it's a matter of trying to satisfy people's sensibilities. The rules have always been a balancing act - balancing the offense of some at being restricted against the offense others take at certain statements. More a matter of practicality than idealism. So, until it is shown that some pretty hefty offense is being caused by the flags, it does not behoove the mods to restrict them. So far as we can see, they are likely to get more, and louder, and more disruptive offense from resticting them than their presence causes. Simply put - It may be nicely idealistic to restict the flags, but it will serve nobody if doing so starts flames. [/QUOTE]

Verification