Given the standard and supposed ideal of what /townhall/ is to be, with productive discussions and arguments of serious topics and all, the current standard of allowing accusatory and, frankly, rather insulting remarks seems to be counterproductive.
Someone immediately saying your arguments are "intellectually dishonest", malicious, antagonistic, or belligerent, is never going to result in a productive dialogue, as it explicitly goes after the tone, rather than the actual arguments presented.
It contributes absolutely nothing to a productive dialogue, and only serves to escalate aggression in arguments, leading them straight down the line of name-calling back and forths.
This is primarily because there's not really a good defense for someone saying "You're being malicious", since any explanation of your reasonings for statements could be simply met with the same statement. You're still being malicious, or belligerent, or intellectually dishonest.
The only real practical response is to resort to the same kinds of statements. When someone says "You're being intellectually dishonest", you respond with "You're being needlessly antagonistic". But, the problem is, that can end up just going back and forth, because these aren't practical statements that mean
anything, in terms of provable logic. They're just perceived critiques. So, the other guy just has to respond with "You're just assuming malice", and you've got the whole fiasco continued.
Needless to say, this kind of "nuh-uh, you're the butt" back and forth is inherently counter-productive to any healthy discussion.
Given that /townhall/ seems to desire a stronger standard for discussion, to the point of banning the slightest bit of sarcasm which seems to me to be a good mile less disruptive, it does not make any sense that this kind of behavior is allowed.
Personally, I would've thought it wasn't
allowed, given rule 2. But, it seems that Mondo has clarified that such behavior is perfectly acceptable at the moment.
So, I'm hoping to make this thread to say "Hey, maybe it shouldn't be".
Truth be told, I wouldn't mind this type of thing applying to the whole site. These kinds of things are rather, to be quite flat, dickish. But, given that even Mondo, who seemed to be the most okay with these particular statements agreed that it would [and did] devolve into back-and-forth namecalling >>4454
, if nothing else the place that is supposedly specifically for polite and productive discussions should have such items explicitly prohibited.
Sarcasm is far less disruptive, and yet that's banned on /townhall/. I don't see any sensible reason why this particular item should not also be the case.