Bring back a specific Abortion Debate board?

74 posts / 0 new
Last post
bunnyfufu's picture
Joined: 10/21/05
Posts: 203
Bring back a specific Abortion Debate board?

As you can read across many debates, this has become an issue.

I am a weird outlier in the bunch of you as I am a pro-choice birthmother. I know that there are other birthmothers on here and they are way cooler than I am with being super-human like and well-adjusted and all. I am just an imperfect human being and an imperfect mom who is doing my best to keep her skills sharp.

I really like you all and think that you have interesting and intelligent things to say. I want very much to be in the conversation. But I do not always want it to turn to abortion. I can go there with you sometimes, sure. And as Rivergallery so pointedly invited me to do so, "face it."

But, sheesh. It is a bit overwhelming.

Does anyone else wish that there was a specific board to hash out Abortion issues? I don't think it's a problem to have it come through conversation here. . . but the agenda is so heavy sometimes that it is beyond the pale.

mom2robbie's picture
Joined: 01/20/07
Posts: 2541

This reply has nothing to do with the abortion debate but...

It is cool that you are a birth mom. One of my nieces is a birth mom as well as the wife of one of my nephews. I am an adoptee (from back in the day of only closed adoptions). My birth mom recently passed away (we had been reunited since 1996) and so your mention of being a birth mom caught my eye.

bunnyfufu's picture
Joined: 10/21/05
Posts: 203

"mom2robbie" wrote:

This reply has nothing to do with the abortion debate but...

It is cool that you are a birth mom. One of my nieces is a birth mom as well as the wife of one of my nephews. I am an adoptee (from back in the day of only closed adoptions). My birth mom recently passed away (we had been reunited since 1996) and so your mention of being a birth mom caught my eye.

Thanks for saying that. Smile My birthdaughter is almost 21 and we have a good relationship. It was an open adoption and I am grateful daily.

And I think I was a helpful voice on the old abortion debate board. I felt helpful in bridging the gap.

It's just that when it is the constant foci, it becomes difficult. It simply is not that way in life. People, even deeply pro-life people walk around with some kind of mask of civility.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

ETA: In thinking about it more, I don't know that it totally needs its own board ~ its the bringing it into every topic that is wearing *me* down and catching me off guard. The rules state that it should be labeled. Missy, I don't care if the *quick reply* feature does not allow a poster to label a totally unrelated post ~ that just means that on a post where a poster is interjecting an abortion rant to an unrelated subject they can't use the *quick reply* feature and has to label their rant appropriately. That doesn't seem like such a hardship to keep the peace or comply with the stated rules of the board, does it? When a debate topic is about abortion it should also be labeled as such.*edited to remove personal information that clearly does not matter ~ admin clearly does not care if this is hurtful to members so there is no point in sharing it. Sorry.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

No we have been there and it doesn't work. No one bothers to even look at it so it is pointless to have a separate board for one topic. Melissa if I remember right wasn't it you who brought abortion into the gun thread in the first place?

"Potter75" wrote:

Hey 15600 was a HUGE OMG number to you on the last debate. If 31000 in this one is no big sweat I get it. Double the number of actual people vs fetuses. Dead. But you don't care at all. That's cool. Anyway I'm celebrating the faux holiday of 5 may so I will have to catch you ttomorrow.
Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

I am always up for an abortion debate. I don't think it needs its own board but I do think that since people are sensitive to the topic that either it's put up in the debate title or the post is started with it.

I don't think this should be done with everything but I do think that people on both sides have trouble with this topic a lot so why not?

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

I don't want it to be its own board really, but I don't want anymore arguments of this sort:

"Why do you care about this but don't care about aborted babies"

To me, bringing up abortion if it contributes to the existing debate, is okay with me. To bring it up because you want to use the existing debate to convince other people to change their mind about the abortion debate is not okay. I think if one asks themselves before posting if it fits in the second category, then it will become obvious when you should refrain from saying what you are about to say.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

Or another question you could ask is "am I using this debate to express my outrage that more people are not pro-life/pro-choice like me"

If the answer is yes, then don't post it

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

Perhaps we can make a generic rule for this board about "topic obsession" we can use my questions above in the writing as an example of violation. Make the wording more generic

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"KimPossible" wrote:

I don't want it to be its own board really, but I don't want anymore arguments of this sort:

"Why do you care about this but don't care about aborted babies"

I don't understand how this is any diffferent from the post quoted above which is essentially just the opposite.

"Why do you care about aborted babies but don't care about this"

Seems kind of hypocritical that it is ok if you bring abortion into the thread for that reason instead of the other way.

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

I believe that was just a retort to the original comment.

Seriously, can you please just answer if you want it to be okay or not without nitpicking at who said what or why? That's not the point of this.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"Jessica80" wrote:

I believe that was just a retort to the original comment.

Seriously, can you please just answer if you want it to be okay or not without nitpicking at who said what or why? That's not the point of this.

It's not? It sure seemed that way to me, specifically aimed at one person. At least that's the gist I got from the post that was mostly edited so it is not there anymore. As soon as I pointed out that others who are making the accusations have done the same thing magically most of that post disappeared.

And no it wasn't a retort to anything go back to the original thread and check it out. Post #50

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

I don't understand how this is any diffferent from the post quoted above which is essentially just the opposite.

"Why do you care about aborted babies but don't care about this"

Seems kind of hypocritical that it is ok if you bring abortion into the thread for that reason instead of the other way.

I'm sorry, I don't know what quotes you are referring to or comparing to each other. If you don't agree with my proposal, just tell me why. I think the two questions I have suggested would be sufficient in figuring out if it's appropriate to bring up a different topic or not. If you object to the questions, tell me why. If you have another suggested solution, offer it up.

And I don't think it's useful to talk about specific instances, we are looking for solutions going forward, not to hash out things that have already happened.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

It's not? It sure seemed that way to me, specifically aimed at one person. At least that's the gist I got from the post that was mostly edited so it is not there anymore. As soon as I pointed out that others who are making the accusations have done the same thing magically most of that post disappeared.

What do you want to make this about Gloria? If you don't think there is any problem, just say that. I've a proposed a generic solution so why are you trying to make this about specific people.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"KimPossible" wrote:

What do you want to make this about Gloria? If you don't think there is any problem, just say that. I've a proposed a generic solution so why are you trying to make this about specific people.

Because that is what it is. About a specific person who has been singled out for doing something that another person did the exact same thing and it was ok because they were making the opposite point. I really like the suggestion Missy already gave. If abortion or any other unrelated topic is interjected into a debate and you don't think it belongs... ignore it. Seems pretty simple. No additional rules.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

Because that is what it is. About a specific person who has been singled out for doing something that another person did the exact same thing and it was ok because they were making the opposite point. I really like the suggestion Missy already gave. If abortion or any other unrelated topic is interjected into a debate and you don't think it belongs... ignore it. Seems pretty simple. No additional rules.

If you want to talk specifics, then fine. I completely disagree. Melissa does NOT bring up a single debate topic issue over and over again in other debates. Now I like Bonita and am glad she is here but I do take issue with this particular behavior. This is an issue off topic obsession. Trust me, if it was a single and isolated occurrence, by Bonita or anyone, we would not be here even discussing it. Do you agree?

AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6568

Obviously abortion is just going to have to be a taboo topic going forward because that is a sensitive topic for some of the more active posters on this board. That is fine if we are all on the same page. I would never wish to be the cause of someone reliving a traumatic experience over and over again. That was never my intent. There are other hot button topics that brought up repeatedly to prove a point even if they are not what the current debate is about. Recent examples would be boycotting Chick Fil A or Walmart or Gay marriage. That said, with feelings on the topic as strong as they are, I think it just needs to be an off limits topic for right now.

I will be honest and say I had no idea that there was such hostility toward me over this topic. I love this board and the companionship that it gives me during the day. It would be my wish that we could debate, disagree, and still find similar ground to meet on. We are all woman (Great woman), mothers, and human beings. This board has also been such a learning, stretch my world experience. From everything from whether or not to use a washcloth in the shower to circumcision.... I would absolutly hate for that to end because of one debate topic.

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

Post#107 (Bonita)
It is amazing to me the outrage of roughly 31,000 dying each year due to guns. The people rallying around saying that everything possible to be done to save as many of those lives as possible. That some good honest people should make sacrifices of their constitutional gun rights in order to save some of these precious lives. However, no one cares about the 1.2 million babies being aborted every year. That we can't possibly put any restrictions on abortions because it would infringe on the very few that were raped or deformed.

The irony is astounding.

Post 108 (Melissa):
And you know what? I don't care about other peoples fetuses that much. I just don't. I do care about my living children and my living, breathing, fellow americans. And for you to compare some barely pink pee stick of a 6 week old pregnancy who was then aborted to my living breathing children and wonder why I care about people killing my children? Well, it isn't complicated. And I think that it is completely sick and effed up and I simply don't BELIEVE those of you who purport to care so much about that "precious" fetal tissue but don't seem to give a lick about the living breathing babies who are being killed. So I guess I throw your question back at you. Why so interested in the contents of other peoples precious womb's but the second that those babies come out your "rights" are then more important than my babies? The irony IS astounding

Not that it matters but to clear it up Gloria. It was a retort to the first comment.

I hate the idea that we have to avoid topics. But, while topics can veer, I hate to go off topic all the time. It muddles things. I hate to be talking about guns and then having to defend abortion rights.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

"AlyssaEimers" wrote:

Obviously abortion is just going to have to be a taboo topic going forward because that is a sensitive topic for some of the more active posters on this board. That is fine if we are all on the same page. I would never wish to be the cause of someone reliving a traumatic experience over and over again. That was never my intent. There are other hot button topics that brought up repeatedly to prove a point even if they are not what the current debate is about. Recent examples would be boycotting Chick Fil A or Walmart or Gay marriage. That said, with feelings on the topic as strong as they are, I think it just needs to be an off limits topic for right now.

I will be honest and say I had no idea that there was such hostility toward me over this topic. I love this board and the companionship that it gives me during the day. It would be my wish that we could debate, disagree, and still find similar ground to meet on. We are all woman (Great woman), mothers, and human beings. This board has also been such a learning, stretch my world experience. From everything from whether or not to use a washcloth in the shower to circumcision.... I would absolutly hate for that to end because of one debate topic.

Bonita, it's not the topic itself I take issue with, I think we are capable of talking about sensitive subjects. It's about the choice to bring it up when you do. You choose to interject it into other debates. Be honest, in the latest example, was your purpose in mentioning it to argue that people should not care about 31,000 people dying from guns and therefore we do not need gun control legislation? Because that is the only way the comment would support the actual topic at hand.

Otherwise it was just a moment to express your frustration that people don't see abortion the same way you do , or to make people feel like they should see abortion differently because they care about gun deaths. If you are trying to change people's minds about gun control or get them to see gun control the way you see it, then it's about the debate topic. If you are trying to make people see abortion differently, or see abortion the way you do, then its no longer about gun control, its about abortion, and does not belong in the gun control debate.

Edited to clarify and to fix all sorts of typos because i first wrote this on my phone.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"KimPossible" wrote:

If you want to talk specifics, then fine. I completely disagree. Melissa does NOT bring up a single debate topic issue over and over again in other debates. Now I like Bonita and am glad she is here but I do take issue with this particular behavior. This is an issue off topic obsession. Trust me, if it was a single and isolated occurrence, by Bonita or anyone, we would not be here even discussing it. Do you agree?

And I'm pretty sure Missy already addressed it. Don't you agree? You can't single someone out for posting about what is important to them. Of course that is going to come out more often. And if we are going to talk about specifics actually Melissa does frequently interject things that aren't related to the debate like for instance making veiled references to people being bigoted or the way she often puts people down for things like homeschooling or their lifestyle choices. If everyone has to put on their big girl panties and ignore those things then I don't understand why it should be any different than ignoring Bonita expressing her sadness that people don't seem to care about the millions of babies aborted evey year.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"Jessica80" wrote:

Not that it matters but to clear it up Gloria. It was a retort to the first comment.

I hate the idea that we have to avoid topics. But, while topics can veer, I hate to go off topic all the time. It muddles things. I hate to be talking about guns and then having to defend abortion rights.

That isn't what I was referring to. I was talking about this post that was WAY before Bonita brought anything up. If anything Bonita's post would have been in response to what Melissa said earlier.

Post #49

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

Or we could just agree that anything is dangerous if the right precautions are not taken. Children require supervision in pools just the same as they require supervision with guns to be safe. And a pool needs to be fenced off so children can't accidentally fall in just as a gun should be put up so children can't accidentally fire it. Seems pretty simple to me.

Post #50

"Potter75" wrote:

Hey 15600 was a HUGE OMG number to you on the last debate. If 31000 in this one is no big sweat I get it. Double the number of actual people vs fetuses. Dead. But you don't care at all. That's cool. Anyway I'm celebrating the faux holiday of 5 may so I will have to catch you ttomorrow.
KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

And I'm pretty sure Missy already addressed it. Don't you agree? You can't single someone out for posting about what is important to them. Of course that is going to come out more often.

What harm do you see in making a rule about it? That is not singling out anyone. That is making a rule that we all have to follow. I'm sorry but this is starting to sound like your way of dealing with a personal beef you have. You insist on specifics. I am suggesting rules we all have to follow.

And if we are going to talk about specifics actually Melissa does frequently interject things that aren't related to the debate like for instance making veiled references to people being bigoted

What are you talking about? If someone states their stance on a debate, and the comments are bigoted, that is not interjecting 'other debate topics'. That is commenting on the issue at hand.

or the way she often puts people down for things like homeschooling or their lifestyle choices. If everyone has to put on their big girl panties and ignore those things then I don't understand why it should be any different than ignoring Bonita expressing her sadness that people don't seem to care about the millions of babies aborted evey year.

Any point i have ever seen Melissa make was in order to support a stance on the topic at hand. If she brought up homeschooling, it was not to change someones mind about homeschooling or complain that people don't see homeschooling the way she does. If you don't agree, well now you would have a rule in place that you could reference.

Look, do you disagree with my proposal for a generic rule. If you feel like someone is violating it over and over again, then you would then have grounds to force them to stop. What are you actually complaining about?

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

I can't argue this anymore. It's not the same. Melissa does not bring up the same topic in every debate.

The question remains of how we want to handle it going forward. Not "na na you did this, you did that". It's a stupid waste of time.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

That isn't what I was referring to. I was talking about this post that was WAY before Bonita brought anything up. If anything Bonita's post would have been in response to what Melissa said earlier.

Post #49

Post #50

Do you feel her intent was to support the notion that 31,000 should be a big deal, or do you think she was trying to change your mind about the unrelated topic (abortion).

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"KimPossible" wrote:

Do you feel her intent was to support the notion that 31,000 should be a big deal, or do you think she was trying to change your mind about the unrelated topic (abortion).

Her intent was to try to change my mind about gun control by bringing up an unrelated topic(abortion)

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

Her intent was to try to change my mind about gun control by bringing up an unrelated topic(abortion)

EXACTLY, she was debating the topic, not a different one. Do you believe Bonita's comment was to convince people to see her view on or change their minds about gun control

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"KimPossible" wrote:

Look, do you disagree with my proposal for a generic rule. If you feel like someone is violating it over and over again, then you would then have grounds to force them to stop. What are you actually complaining about?

Yes I do. So who gets to decide when someone brings up a topic too much? Are we going to start tattling on each other.... so and so brought this up x many times? Can't we just be big girls and follow the existing rules and if something bothers you ignore it? How are we going to force them to stop... tell someone you are forbidden to say anything about xxx topic or what?

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

Yes I do. So who gets to decide when someone brings up a topic too much? Are we going to start tattling on each other.... so and so brought this up x many times? Can't we just be big girls and follow the existing rules and if something bothers you ignore it? How are we going to force them to stop... tell someone you are forbidden to say anything about xxx topic or what?

Rule is you can bring an off topic up if it is used to support your argument about the topic at hand. Not to make a point about the other topic. The issue is repeated behavior, so first ttime you are warned, second time is considered breaking the rules. It has caused enough frustration that I don't think it should go unaddressed. You aren't even denying it happens anymore...you are just asking people to ignore It. Seems it bothers enough people in this community that it is worth addressing specifically.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"KimPossible" wrote:

EXACTLY, she was debating the topic, not a different one. Do you believe Bonita's comment was to convince people to see her view on or change their minds about gun control

Yes I do think it was about gun control and just as much on topic as Melissa's was. Her post is about how some think it is ok to restrict guns which is a constitutional right but don't think it is ok to restrict abortions because that would infringe on their rights.

It is amazing to me the outrage of roughly 31,000 dying each year due to guns. The people rallying around saying that everything possible to be done to save as many of those lives as possible. That some good honest people should make sacrifices of their constitutional gun rights in order to save some of these precious lives. However, no one cares about the 1.2 million babies being aborted every year. That we can't possibly put any restrictions on abortions because it would infringe on the very few that were raped or deformed.

The irony is astounding.

AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6568

Kim, I believe you made your point. I already offered to make abortion an off limits topic.

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

Abortions are restricted. But that's another debate Wink

Again, Gloria, let's not rehash what was said or not said. You are the lone person here who thinks things are okay as they are. Many of us of frustrated. As I said, I love an abortion debate but I don't want EVERY debate to be one.

I think Kim has a good idea. Purposely going OT should have a warning. After that it is rule breaking.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

Yes I do think it was about gun control and just as much on topic as Melissa's was. Her post is about how some think it is ok to restrict guns which is a constitutional right but don't think it is ok to restrict abortions.

..... therefore what does Bonita think about gun control? Or is trying to get other people to think about gun control? That they shouldn't care about 31000 deaths? Because that's less than the amount of abortions?

I think you are being purposely obtuse now. That comment was not meant to convince anyone to change their mind about gun control and you know it.

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

"AlyssaEimers" wrote:

Kim, I believe you made your point. I already offered to make abortion an off limits topic.

But we don't want it "off limits". We want it in appropriate settings.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

"AlyssaEimers" wrote:

Kim, I believe you made your point. I already offered to make abortion an off limits topic.

Okay, well I don't think you get it if you think that is my point. If you would like us to stop referring to you specifically I can do that, I originally tried to but gloria wanted to talk about you and Melissa.

Why did you only address me in this post? If someone is going to disagree with me and state their case, I should be allowed to respond.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"KimPossible" wrote:

..... therefore what does Bonita think about gun control? Or is trying to get other people to think about gun control? That they shouldn't care about 31000 deaths? Because that's less than the amount of abortions?

I think you are being obtuse now. That comment was not meant to convince anyone to change their mind about gun control and you know it.

No I don't know it. I think that this is a witch hunt singling out one person for something that others have done just because it is a topic that you object to. I'm sure Missy has plenty of time to get PM's from people that someone mentioned something x many times so she can warn people. Meanwhile it is ok for Melissa to post personal attacks that drive people like wlillie completely off the board.

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

Lillie drove herself away from this board and I have no sympathy for her for leaving. Nobody ganged up on her.

I'm not objecting to the topic and Kim and Melissa have actively engaged in abortion debates in the past.

It's not a witch hunt.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

No I don't know it. I think that this is a witch hunt singling out one person for something that others have done just because it is a topic that you object to. I'm sure Missy had plenty of time to get PM's from people that someone mentioned something x many times so she can warn people. Meanwhile it is ok for Melissa to post personal attacks that drive people like wlillie completely off the board.

I don't understand why you think it's a witch hunt. No one is looking to get anyone banned. I don't want Bonita to go anywhere, I actually like what she adds to a lot of debates because she fits less into a neat little liberal or conservative box than a lot of the rest of us do. I'm proposing an addition to the rules that everyone would have to follow, not just one person. No witch hunt. And please, we have other rules, we don't act like those are some huge burden to admin. People generally follow the rules when they are explicitly stated.

And I'm done arguing about the differences between those abortion comments in the debate because I think i have clearly stated my point and I think you get it even if you won't admit it and I think we are making Bonita feel uncomfortable.

You have a personal problem with Melissa that is cloudng your judgment on this one.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"KimPossible" wrote:

And I'm done arguing about the differences between those abortion comments in the debate because I think i have clearly stated my point and I think you get it even if you won't admit it and I think we are making Bonita feel uncomfortable.

Well I guess I just really AM obtuse because I still don't see any difference between those comments. I'm done though because at this point it is just going in circles. I have stated my opinion. I think things ARE just fine the way they are and what Missy stated is the best solution. If something bothers you either ignore it or go ahead and point out that it is off topic without making it a personal attack.

mom2robbie's picture
Joined: 01/20/07
Posts: 2541

:timeout:

OK ladies, not sure where Missy is and she may reopen this thread but what I see is a lot of attacking other people. That is not what the debate board is about and so I am locking this thread.

MissyJ's picture
Joined: 01/31/02
Posts: 3229

For those not wanting to read through -- short version -- from this point forward:

Debates that are abortion specific -- please clearly label "Abort. Ment." in the subject line if it is not clearly titled.

POSTS that reference abortion, "pro-life" or "pro-choice" matters, etc. in ANY OTHER debate topic -- please use the Advanced reply option and label appropriately. We are not going to try and pick and choose whether it is related or not and this is expected of both "sides."

For other "sensitive topic" issues (parenting choices, religion, gay marriage, political leanings, lifestyle choices): Those opting to use a non-related debate topic to insert a dig, personal attack, or bash regarding one of those listed MUST abide by the Community Guidelines. If you cannot refrain from interjecting those within a debate, step away or risk the consequences of your own actions. IF you feel that it IS related to the debate, please use Advanced Reply and label accordingly.

Those that fail to abide by the request to label as outlined above will be offered one warning. A second offense may result in the disabling of your account. As previously -- those violating the Community Guidelines with personal attacks / digs already have consequences spelled out.

It is my STRONG desire not to have ANYONE banned as I truly believe every one of you has something positive to contribute to this debate and community.

****************
Those wishing for more background information may read on:

"bunnyfufu" wrote:

And I think I was a helpful voice on the old abortion debate board. I felt helpful in bridging the gap.

Thank you for coming back to share your point of view. You have been missed and I wholeheartedly agree that you were a positive contributor on our former Abortion Debate board.

Unfortunately, the board died out due to lack of participation several years ago.

"Potter75" wrote:

ETA: In thinking about it more, I don't know that it totally needs its own board ~ its the bringing it into every topic that is wearing *me* down and catching me off guard.

Melissa (and all) -- I think that point is fair to make about how it impacts you and I believe that through sharing that alone can perhaps make others recognize the sensitivity of what they have to say, just as you and others have been asked to do on other subjects that people may feel passionately personal about. That doesn't mean, however, that someone else is prohibited from making a debate point on the topic. I believe, (or rather hope) that this can be accomplished by communicating with one another as without attacking "in kind" and extending the same courtesy to others. You all have gotten to know one another well enough through the years to recognize those hot button issues for each other.

Again, this is rather how we dealt with "discussions" on various birth boards where some felt extremely passionate about particular topics (carseats, breastfeeding/formula, crying it out, etc.) -- and then wanted to proclaim that they were attacked when someone offered a disagreeing point of view. (Melis -- I know you were involved in some of those and we agreed /supported your -- and others -- right to offer your opinions/advice. "Support does not always equal agreement."

When that same idea is applied here, obviously since this IS a debate there are bound to be vastly different points of view. As has been clear on these threads each side seems to view the same post(s) through their own "lens".

For example, it would be unfair to call Bonita's post a "rant" and not the same for your previous mention within the debate. Again -- according to what you seem to wish, BOTH posts now going forward would need to be labeled... and all other posts interjecting other "sensitive topics" within unrelated debates will fall under the Community guidelines.

(Again -- I *get* that BOTH sides see these completely differently... but for others it shows up as that age old argument of whether the "glass is half empty or half full.")

I am incredibly sorry for your experience and that of anyone that has suffered the same. To state that "Admin doesn't care" when something is hurtful to others is not true.

Kim - while I appreciate your idea and the desire to find a workable solution, I have read through all of the notes here along with the private messages and emails of those reading / participating throughout the site, more from various hosts, and including one from someone not a member but that follows the debates. All those received and posted here reflect a fairly balanced representation on how various people "see" the same thing. Again, that analogy mentioned above about "half empty / half full" comes to mind.

You (and others on the same "side") viewed Bonita's post as unrelated to the topic. I get that you (general) disagree or feel that her point was irrelevant and only centered to make a point on the topic of abortion alone.... whereas others (incl. Bonita) viewed her post being centered on some wanting laws changed for what they deem as for the "greater good" in relation to gun rights in one instance despite the removal of "rights" of many, but applied the reverse in another instance (the latter being related to abortion rights.)

I realize that not everyone will be happy with the outlined solution at the top. I had hoped that my original note was adequate combined with our community guidelines. Since this does appear to be something that is important to many of you we will try this out over the next few months and revisit to see how it is working at that time.

~Missy

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

Okay Missy, that's fine. I hope you weighted the input from the ten or twelve of us that actually keep this board active more heavily than those who may possibly never participate here ever but I can accept your decision. If the same thing keeps happening, labeled or not....I don't ignore much on these threads but im pretty sure I can handle my own using simple debate tactics that are within the rules...just makes debating more of an effort to deal with this stuff regularly. If I get tired of it, I'll take a break from this place. Won't be the first time.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

Political leanings are a sensitive topic? I'm super confused. Honestly confused as to how one labels political leanings. I'm an independent- how do I label anything?

Also, maybe its just me, but I couldn't really care less how someone who isn't a member feels about debates that they don't participate in.

and including one from someone not a member but that follows the debates

and I think that it is odd that they should have valued input into how debates that they don't participate in are run.

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

Ok -
#1 - not sure why everyone else is so upset.. I was the one "called out" at the beginning of this thread.
#2 - Our society doesn't keep topics in bubbles and thus debate topics will by very nature overlap.
#3 - if a topic wasn't introduced by Bonita.. not sure why the person(s) introducing it have a right to be upset when she comments on it.

-- I think the rules are great, will save the feelings of those not wanting to read certain things, and allow them to still contribute to the debate.--

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"Potter75" wrote:

Political leanings are a sensitive topic? I'm super confused. Honestly confused as to how one labels political leanings. I'm an independent- how do I label anything?

Also, maybe its just me, but I couldn't really care less how someone who isn't a member feels about debates that they don't participate in.

and including one from someone not a member but that follows the debates

and I think that it is odd that they should have valued input into how debates that they don't participate in are run.

Last I heard this was a FREE board. Why should Missy have to answer to anyone on how she chooses to make her decisions? It could very well be someone who doesn't participate on the debate board but is part of admin.

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

She said the person wasn't a mbr. Admin would be a member.

Which means someone who is not registered and is following our debates and decided to say something. Creepy.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"Jessica80" wrote:

She said the person wasn't a mbr. Admin would be a member.

Which means someone who is not registered and is following our debates and decided to say something. Creepy.

Seriously you don't think hundreds of people follow our debates that aren't members? I just now checked and it shows 83 people viewing the board that aren't members. If that concerns you maybe you shouldn't be posting here.

Joined: 03/08/03
Posts: 3189

I think it's a little creepy too, but funny. Hello, gawkers!

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

Seriously you don't think hundreds of people follow our debates that aren't members? I just now checked and it shows 83 people viewing the board that aren't members. If that concerns you maybe you shouldn't be posting here.

Agreed- it isn't a private board.

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

Gloria. I'm not stupid. I think it's creepy that they are not members, follow us and then feel it's appropriate to PM Missy's their opinion. I'm sorry. That's weird.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"freddieflounder101" wrote:

I think it's a little creepy too, but funny. Hello, gawkers!

I read some boards that I love (like GOMI, pure hilarity) but never comment there/am not a member because I'm not witty enough and don't have enough time to get invested. That said I can't imagine messaging with the site owner as a non participant feeling as though I had valuable insight to contribute. I don't know. I guess I'm arrogant but not delusional. Or something.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"Jessica80" wrote:

Gloria. I'm not stupid. I think it's creepy that they are not members, follow us and then feel it's appropriate to PM Missy's their opinion. I'm sorry. That's weird.

Well I would guess if Missy values their opinion than it must be someone she knows personally. I don't think it would be weird at all for someone she knows to follow threads on a board that she personally runs.

Pages