Originally Posted by goboatingnow
Slightly off topic but to answer your question firstly gun carry adherents tend to eulogise, just as much as the antis and hence this generates debate. There's simply no way it isn't going to, it's a very emotive subject. ( especially to an international audience) it's like abortion etc.
As to why the mods zoom in on gun threads I never understand it may be the commercial
aspect of this forum that causes that . It very unclear as others have said constant references
to the " community rules" without any explanation has become Orwellian in nature here. I am reminded of the Daleks in Doctor Who
Moderators don't "zoom in on gun threads," and we certainly don't act based on "the commercial aspect of this forum." I'm not even sure what is meant by that phrase.
Our imprimatur is to maintain a peaceful gathering place and to promote a cordial sharing of information, experiences and points of view among boating
enthusiasts from all over the planet. In addition to preserving a collegial atmosphere for these discussions, our focus is on keeping CF as non-commercial as possible . . . because that's the way the members want it.
Through long experience, we have learned where the land mines are buried - you know the ones: guns
, multi/mono, piracy
, anchors, young sailors chasing records and fame, etc. To the extent that members can discuss these hot-button issues without undermining the peace we work so hard to maintain, we have no reason to get involved. Unfortunately, even the most narrowly-focused thread-opening post on any of the above subjects can quickly get knocked off course by just a single
post in which a thoughtless remark, even if it's intended to be humorous, dramatically polarizes the discussion and readers react emotionally.
, the introduction
of emotionally-driven opprobrium, usually of a personal nature, is the problem - not
the subject of the intended discussion. As long as a discussion stays on-topic and violates no rules, it continues. When, not if, it turns into a snarky contest of wills between those with diametrically-opposed, deeply-held beliefs who feel they must answer what they emotionally perceive as a provocation, the moderation team is compelled to step into the brawl and restore the peace.
Why do we refer the combatants to the Rules in the aftermath of such an intervention? Because it is the violation of a rule
, or rules, that leads to Official Warnings, then Strikes against member
accounts. If a member accumulates three strikes, he / she is banned from Cruisers Forum.
It is amazing to the site staff that more than 95% of our thousands of members can read the rules, agree to abide by them and do so, yet a tiny minority acknowledge that they, too, have read the rules, have also agreed to abide by them, then ignore them, mock them, belittle them, flaunt them . . . all in the interest of forcefully expressing a deeply-held view about an emotional subject to a complete stranger they will never meet, in the mistaken assumption that they will change the mind of that faceless stranger who holds equally firm beliefs from the opposite perspective.
The absurdity of it is simply astonishing.
So when yet another gun thread, or piracy
thread, or . . . well, you get the drift . . . pops up on Cruisers Forum, we know where it's going to end, because they always end badly.
It isn't a question of whether
we should get involved, it's a question of when
we should do so.