Timeline for Should a religious text used as an example in a question be removed?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:32 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 13:35 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Fixup of bad MSO links to MSE links migration
|
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 9:11 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
|
|
| Nov 9, 2011 at 17:59 | comment | added | Randolf Richardson | @slhck: That's the "tough call" factor, for sure (and I'm not too worried about it in this particular case either). If something does seem tricky to judge though, I find it's sometimes useful to consider an opposite-hypothetical of if the example text used was based on, say, for this situation, some texts from an outspoken evil cult that worships some destructive devil deity. In this particular case, it would probably still not be a problem for me, but I suspect that there would be a lot more objection about the content given the general popularity of non-evil-focused religions. | |
| Nov 9, 2011 at 17:48 | comment | added | slhck | @Randolf Yes, in general, you are absolutely right, and I would for example probably remove unnecessary content from a post when editing (such as the example I gave). It's a really tough call, but we'd of course expect people not to push their morals, that is true. It's just that in this particular case I'm fine with it – the OP probably just didn't think of it. | |
| Nov 9, 2011 at 17:26 | comment | added | Randolf Richardson | @slhck: I think your example about Mac enthusiasm is an excellent one that demonstrates over-hype (which detracts from the quality of S.U.), which is very different from someone suggesting a solution to a problem and qualifying their reason for recommending it (e.g., "this product works well for me because it doesn't consume massive amounts of system resources, and it finishes its tasks quickly without prompting the user to make a lot of complicated decisions"). | |
| Nov 9, 2011 at 17:21 | comment | added | Randolf Richardson | @slhck: ...and therein lies the problem. I already upvoted your answer because I agree with acting on something when it comes up. However, there is also something to be said for encouraging people not to push their morals on others as seems to be common with people who hold extreme viewpoints on religious matters (and purposely mix their doctrine in to every communication with the intention of trying to convert the world, and such nonsense). There are forums (and newsgroups, etc.) that are suited for religious discussion, and the espousing of religious views is definitely a misfit for S.U. | |
| Nov 9, 2011 at 8:21 | comment | added | slhck | @Randolf You're right, there's a small line, but wrt. your example: If that were something a lot of people found offensive, somebody would have said something – or we would even see trolling, hate speech, etc. In the case of the OP, I think they had a legitimate problem (after all, the verses are numbered). The point for me here is that I don't want to step on somebody's toes just because somebody might theoretically feel offended. After all, you could also say stuff like "I just got my Mac, I love it, it's really great, but … " should be edited out because it could feed PC vs. Mac trolls. | |
| Nov 9, 2011 at 7:44 | vote | accept | Nifle | ||
| Nov 8, 2011 at 23:30 | comment | added | Randolf Richardson | @slhck: I generally agree with you (+1), but I'm concerned about where the line should be drawn. For a non-religious example with dress code, co-workers obviously won't tolerate a nudist who insists on coming to work completely nude, but a certain type of clothing may or may not be tolerable to others -- is it okay to wear a swimsuit to work during summer? What about during winter? What if it's a two-piece string bikini? At least some people may be deeply offended, for a variety of reasons. If a line must be drawn, figuring out where to draw it is the most difficult aspect of this issue. | |
| Nov 8, 2011 at 19:44 | history | edited | Tamara Wijsman | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 184 characters in body
|
| Nov 8, 2011 at 19:32 | history | edited | Tamara Wijsman | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 326 characters in body
|
| Nov 8, 2011 at 19:27 | comment | added | Tamara Wijsman | @slhck: Yeah, your answer showed up in the midst of typing mine. +1 | |
| Nov 8, 2011 at 19:16 | comment | added | slhck | This is almost exactly what I was saying. I don't think we should give people the "We don't tolerate your religion!" experience (even if it wasn't intended). | |
| Nov 8, 2011 at 19:13 | history | answered | Tamara Wijsman | CC BY-SA 3.0 |