Does the SMF Forum Need A Board for Spam only Discussions/Help?

[Arantor]

Having a board reorganisation would actually help a great deal more generally.

[Deaks]

its being finalised

[xrunner]

I was just thinking more about this issue (I know you thought you smelled smoke)  ...

I think the spam issue is different than other issues. Say your theme is broken, at least you know you may have done something wrong and at least you can come here to find an answer. Sorta like a broken pipe and you need a plumber.

But I think the spam issue is different. It's like your home is being violated in a sense. You feel helpless because the invaders keep coming and you don't know why you are targeted. I think it needs more - how shall I say - community support - than other issues. Like it's own board where you can see that you are not alone.

And as always, I may be totally wrong in the way I see this, but I think I have a point or I wouldn't have said anything.

Thanks for reading my suggestions.

[Arantor]

I think the spam issue is different than other issues. Say your theme is broken, at least you know you may have done something wrong and at least you can come here to find an answer. Sorta like a broken pipe and you need a plumber.

IT'S A-ME, MARIO!

It is actually a different kind of issue. Theme issues or code issues are technical problems. Spam isn't, it's a sociological one and a technical solution is only going to give you limited relief.

And as always, I may be totally wrong in the way I see this, but I think I have a point or I wouldn't have said anything.

Let me tell you why you're here. You're here because you know something. What you know you can't explain, but you feel it. You've felt it you're entire life, that there's something wrong with the world. You don't know what it is, but it's there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. It is this feeling that brought you here. Do you know what I'm talking about?

The matrix has you.

You're right, it is a different breed of problem. People don't understand why it is happening or why it can't be fought off with technical solutions. They don't understand why they are relentless, while they will never stop. It's a war out there.

[Deaks]

every point and opinion is valid

[Kindred]

I wouldn't say that Runic...

Everyone HAS an opinion...   but many opinions are not valid because they are based on mistaken impressions, partial facts, or even complete untruths...

[xrunner]

every point and opinion is valid

I wouldn't say that Runic...

If everyone's opinon is valid, then Kindred's opinion is valid. But that would mean that his opinion that not everyone's opinion is valid - is valid. So not everyone's opinion is valid, so Runic's opinion that every opinion is valid - is not valid. But Runic said everyone's opinion is valid ...

Let me tell you why you're here. You're here because you know something. What you know you can't explain, but you feel it. You've felt it you're entire life, that there's something wrong with the world. You don't know what it is, but it's there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. It is this feeling that brought you here. Do you know what I'm talking about?

Take the red pill (create a Spam board)!

[MrPhil]

But that would mean that his opinion that not everyone's opinion is valid - is valid. So not everyone's opinion is valid, so Runic's opinion that every opinion is valid - is not valid.

"not everyone's opinion is valid" =/= "everyone's opinion is not valid" (that all opinions are invalid).

Your point about "everyone's opinion is valid" conflicting with "not everyone's opinion is valid" is still true. Perhaps what @Runic meant was "all opinions are worthy of a courteous evaluation and attempt to understand them"? (And if an opinion proves that the person is a complete dumbass..., have at 'em)

Our society is so PC and afraid of bruising someone else's ego that no one is willing to stand up and call a spade a spade. This allows all sorts of crackpots to flourish and confuse dimwitted people. Exhibit A: Faux Noise.

[xrunner]

Perhaps what @Runic meant was "all opinions are worthy of a courteous evaluation and attempt to understand them"? (And if an opinion proves that the person is a complete dumbass..., have at 'em)

Actually ...

Everyone's opinion is valid. Not everyone's facts are though.

In general, an opinion is a belief about matters commonly considered to be subjective, i.e., it is based on that which is less than absolutely certain, and is the result of emotion or interpretation of facts. An opinion may be supported by an argument, although people may draw opposing opinions from the same set of facts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion

o·pin·ion
[uh-pin-yuhn] Show IPA
noun
1.
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2.
a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/opinion

All I have to do to have an valid opinion for you to consider, is to state that opinion as what I belive. If I do that - it's a valid opinion. It's valid because it's a subjective view of the world and I am not lying about it being my view. If I lyed about it being my opinion, then it would not be a valid opinion.

If John said it was his opinion that the Moon was made of green cheese - it's a perfectly valid opinion if he believed so and said it without lying. The fact is that the moon is not made of green cheese, but that refers to facts not opinions. Now, you are perfectly free to try to change John's opinion, but that still doesn't make the opinion invalid. Any opinion stated by a person, that is not lying that it is their true opinion, is a valid opinion.

If you can convince John that the Moon is made of rock, then his opinion might change. But even if you couldn't, it would still be a valid opinion, but one that contradicts the facts.

Isn't it interesting that all this deep stuff arises from a request for a spam board?

[Arantor]

Your point about "everyone's opinion is valid" conflicting with "not everyone's opinion is valid" is still true. Perhaps what @Runic meant was "all opinions are worthy of a courteous evaluation and attempt to understand them"? (And if an opinion proves that the person is a complete dumbass..., have at 'em)

Runic voiced the part in quotes, Kindred the part in brackets. Funny man and straight man, the pair of them.

Our society is so PC and afraid of bruising someone else's ego that no one is willing to stand up and call a spade a spade.

Explain me then.

This allows all sorts of crackpots to flourish and confuse dimwitted people.

Exhibit B: SEO

The resident crackpot says hello.

Everyone's opinion is valid. Not everyone's facts are though.

What about an opinion based on complete lies? Is that still valid even though the basis for it is a complete fabrication? They may believe it, but it doesn't make it so.

Isn't it interesting that all this deep stuff arises from a request for a spam board?

It is, but it's also sad that this is the umpteenth discussion on a board reorganisation and there's just talk, no do. Though this is possibly the first time something might actually happen.

[xrunner]

Everyone's opinion is valid. Not everyone's facts are though.

What about an opinion based on complete lies? Is that still valid even though the basis for it is a complete fabrication? They may believe it, but it doesn't make it so.

Damn, I wish you were a member of my forum!

Well, were getting into the weeds for sure, but yes it's a valid opinion. We're getting into what is belief, what is knowledge, what is fact ...

I deal with opinions every day on my forum that are utter bull****** as far as relates to the facts as I see them. I don't want to get too much into religion here, but yea, the theists have valid opinions - if I had a rule that some opinions are invalid and can't be stated then we'd have a hard time having discussions. They are valid because they voice them as opinions and (as far as I can tell) they aren't lying. If they were lying about their opinion it would be an invalid opinion. But if they aren't lying - it's a valid opinion.

Now, if they start telling me as an atheist that a deity is, in fact, real, were getting into a whole other area. That would require empirical evidence (that's the method I use to obtain facts and knowledge).

Statement of Opinion: My opinion is that a god exists

^^^ This is a valid opinion

Statement of fact: I know a god exists

^^^ This is an invalid fact (as far as I'm concerned),

So we start off by hearing (valid) opinions but then progress and see if they are indeed factual.

It is, but it's also sad that this is the umpteenth discussion on a board reorganisation and there's just talk, no do. Though this is possibly the first time something might actually happen.

Well the side discussion is fun anyway.

[Arantor]

Damn, I wish you were a member of my forum!

No, you don't. I have been known to invite the door-knocking religious types, invite them in for a cup of tea then have a two hour argument with them about why their ideas of deities are wrong And I don't back down, and they don't like it much.

Statement of Opinion: My opinion is that a god exists

^^^ This is a valid opinion

Statement of fact: I know a god exists

^^^ This is an invalid fact (as far as I'm concerned),

So we start off by hearing (valid) opinions but then progress and see if they are indeed factual.

Yup, this is why it's a problem.

[MrPhil]

I think we're holding different opinions on what "valid" means, when applied to an opinion. The confusion comes about by whether someone claims to be stating a solid fact, or just what they think is going on.

I personally take the stance that "valid" means "provably correct, or at least (for an opinion) reasonably plausible", not that it means "I hold it strongly and am entitled to it". As pointed out before, there are sorts of opinions out there not based on a shred of evidence, or that are not at least even plausible to a reasonable and rational person. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but not all opinions are fact-based enough to satisfy my criteria for plausibility, so I consider most opinions to be invalid. Your opinion is that the Lizard People control our government through the Trilateral Commission; I call it invalid (and that you're nuts), but someone else will call it "valid" because they mean that you're entitled to hold that opinion, as crazy as (they agree) it is.

Our society is so PC and afraid of bruising someone else's ego that no one is willing to stand up and call a spade a spade.

Explain me then.

OK. The Donald stands before adoring crowds (of fellow crackpots) and screams, "The President is a Kenyan socialist!" Does the "lamestream" media stand up to him and ridicule him and shame him into shutting up? No, they just glance nervously at each other and whisper. Are they afraid he'll sue them for defamation? Has the "everyone gets a prize for participating" rule gotten so far out of hand that no one can be criticized? Imagine if Joseph Welch had not stood up to Senator Joe McCarthy with "Let us not assassinate this lad further, Senator. You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?" What if he had been afraid of offending the Wisconsin Nazi? There are lots of people out there who soundly deserve to have their butts mercilessly kicked.

This allows all sorts of crackpots to flourish and confuse dimwitted people.

Exhibit B: SEO

The resident crackpot says hello.

Hello, crackpot. Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of the birthers, truthers, conspiracy theorists, gun nuts, professional Christian hatemongers, and other members of the Tinfoil Hat Brigade. If you want to count yourself among them, be my guest.

[Chalky]

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to what you can argue for.

This article is good too.

[Arantor]

Hello, crackpot. Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of the birthers, truthers, conspiracy theorists, gun nuts, professional Christian hatemongers, and other members of the Tinfoil Hat Brigade. If you want to count yourself among them, be my guest.

No, I'm not in any of those groups (except possible the fringes of the THB), more that most of what you're saying does conceivably apply to me in this forum...

[xrunner]

I personally take the stance that "valid" means "provably correct,

I think green houses are beautiful - that is my valid opinion.

Now prove that my opinion is incorrect.

or at least (for an opinion) reasonably plausible", not that it means "I hold it strongly and am entitled to it".

But what is reasonably plausible for an opinion Mr. Phil? Not a fact - an opinion? Based on what criteria? Remember, we're talking opinions - not facts right now. You are already equating opinions as things that are true or false based on facts. Opinions are not facts. My opinion is valid as an opinion simply because I say so (and I am not lying about it being my opinion).

As pointed out before, there are sorts of opinions out there not based on a shred of evidence, or that are not at least even plausible to a reasonable and rational person.

They are still valid opinions. Stop equating facts and opinions - that's why they are two different words.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but not all opinions are fact-based enough to satisfy my criteria for plausibility,

Right!

so I consider most opinions to be invalid.

Wrong!

[kat]

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to what you can argue for.

This article is good too.

Theyz quiet gud 4 uz untrelcturial types, wotz gud @spullin....

[Chalky]

Theyz quiet gud 4 uz untrelcturial types, wotz gud @spullin....

Aw youz gud @ spullin, for an Essex boy    Wait, did you mean spelling or pulling? 

[Arantor]

dnt b usin ur txtspk k thx iz lazy n luks slly

[kat]

I can do Double-Dutch, if you'd prefer.

I'm quite fluent, in that (Yes, it's a real language, for those who don't know).