** More stringent enforcement of forum rules will be in effect **

[boseador]

Probably won't end well.

I see what you mean. It is a very sensitive issue for most religious people. But still, this is a religion forum and discussing religion is to be expected, right? I guess it's up to the individual to respond or not and in what manner.

Starting a thread to share my opinions about a particular religion is fine?

[anonymous]

I see what you mean. It is a very sensitive issue for most religious people. But still, this is a religion forum and discussing religion is to be expected, right? I guess it's up to the individual to respond or not and in what manner.

Starting a thread to share my opinions about a particular religion is fine?

If you can do it without resorting to slurs/various spellings of slurs or making threats, sure.

[Iceman1800]

Only if it's your own religion. There is no logical reason to start a thread about a religion one doesn't believe in. It will only lead to arguments which is what brought this change on in the first place. This subforum would be gone if it were up to the shareholders who complained.

[HELIX35]

It's a privately owned forum. The owners make the rules. Dealwithit.jpg

You aren't entitled to free speech on a privately owned forum.

I'm perfectly aware of that, thank you

Doesn't make it any less pathetic

[lasher]

What about memes that insult, mock, or ridicule various religious or political beliefs?

[anonymous]

What about memes that insult, mock, or ridicule various religious or political beliefs?

Nope, especially considering most of those are done to get around censors anyway and result in many of the reports from this section.

[Ace Thedics]

The Misc just pretty much declared war on the European nationalist/E-skinheads that were an embarrassment to this place.

Aware me please.

Are these the 3098 accounts that tend to spill this 'European going back to it's roots' stuff in regular misc?

[DizzySmalls]

What about memes that insult, mock, or ridicule various religious or political beliefs?

No more "euphoric" fedora atheist pictures. I would be deeply hurt if you continued to post those.

[GregariousWolf]

Only if it's your own religion. There is no logical reason to start a thread about a religion one doesn't believe in. It will only lead to arguments which is what brought this change on in the first place. This subforum would be gone if it were up to the shareholders who complained.

Only start a thread if it's your own political party. There's no logical reason to start a thread about a political party you don't belong to. It will only lead to arguments and we wouldn't want that, now would we?

[boseador]

Only if it's your own religion. There is no logical reason to start a thread about a religion one doesn't believe in. It will only lead to arguments which is what brought this change on in the first place. This subforum would be gone if it were up to the shareholders who complained.

I am a Muslims now. lol.

[illriginalized]

Well I'm down with the rules. As long as it's applied to everyone equally.

The Misc just pretty much declared war on the European nationalist/E-skinheads that were an embarrassment to this place.

Most of the posts are alright.. a few just made me smh in the belief that they were no different than many of the liberals who are racist/bigots without realizing it.. or do they realize it?

[SquatsAreAwesom]

Only if it's your own religion. There is no logical reason to start a thread about a religion one doesn't believe in. It will only lead to arguments which is what brought this change on in the first place. This subforum would be gone if it were up to the shareholders who complained.

Are the names of the shareholders public information? I'm curious what the precise request was on their part. Not to put my tin foil hat on, but it seems to be obvious that this reaction is a related to all the Israel/Palestine threads that have been popping up.

What peeves me though, is when you consider who exactly has been banned so far. Looking at those threads in particular, the list of banned users who participated in discussions is as follows:
CXC3000, The Big Kahoona, Mehdi84, _Adam_ .... do you see a pattern here?

CXC aside - what is going on?

[lasher]

Are the names of the shareholders public information? I'm curious what the precise request was on their part. Not to put my tin foil hat on, but it seems to be obvious that this reaction is a related to all the Israel/Palestine threads that have been popping up.

What peeves me though, is when you consider who exactly has been banned so far. Looking at those threads in particular, the list of banned users who participated in discussions is as follows:
CXC3000, The Big Kahoona, Mehdi84, _Adam_ .... do you see a pattern here?

CXC aside - what is going on?

ziobot was banned as well. Big Kahoona was banned for making a thread bitching about his thread being deleted.

Pattern broken.

[ODBM]

Only if it's your own religion. There is no logical reason to start a thread about a religion one doesn't believe in. It will only lead to arguments which is what brought this change on in the first place. This subforum would be gone if it were up to the shareholders who complained.

But surely formal debate will be not only tolerated, but encouraged.. Right? I also don't see the restriction on posting threads related only to the religious views you hold to be consistent with the rules posted on the first page of this thread, nor do I think it's a sustainable concept. Whose authority will be cited as verification if I convert from Christianity to Islam to post a thread about Islam, and then back to Christianity? Moreover, you have specific cases wherein a user has a wealth of knowledge on a religion which he or she previously adhered to, and for that I will cite boseador who knows more about Islam than most Muslims here, though he himself is no longer Muslim. It would be a great loss for him to be silenced in his attempts to share his upbringing and experiences within Islam.

[gachase21]

Are the names of the shareholders public information?

Start at page 13
http://files.shareholder.com/downloa...096/filing.pdf

and related companies

http://libertyinteractive.com/asset-list.aspx


Think about this for a min

You operate an online and retail merchandising conglomerate company sistered with a media company.

You goal is to increase sales of merchandise with these companies.

One of these companies has a forum. You appreciate the traffic of this forum as it brings visibility to your site. However that traffic represents a very very small percentage of your actual customers.

Now a sub forum of this site has even a smaller percent, however some of the langue and conversation on this forum is so offensive to some potential customers, that it might cause you to lose more customers than the traffic it creates gains.

Why on earth should a company trying to sell retail merchandise be a "free speech" destination for debate that could cause them to lose sales?

[SquatsAreAwesom]

ziobot was banned as well. Big Kahoona was banned for making a thread bitching about his thread being deleted.

Pattern broken.

Ziobot and CXC are both explainable for being trolls.

_Adam_ and Mehdi84 on the other hand are not. If it weren't for some of their posts, including Kahoona's, I would not be able to follow the events happening over there. So yes, I do find it shocking when I see that Mehdi84 created a thread about the #48kMarch, only to see it deleted and him banned. Then this morning, I notice a bunch of the active pro-Palestinian posters are banned. I'll let everyone else decide for themselves instead of speculating further on everyone's behalf.

As a long time bodybuilding.com customer, I would like to know what exactly the shareholders complained about. Are their names public information and have they made a public statement. Are they willing to? If not, that's their right of course, but so is my right to take my business elsewhere.

[whatisbro]

K.//n

[DizzySmalls]

Why on earth should a company trying to sell retail merchandise be a "free speech" destination for debate that could cause them to lose sales?

This is what it comes down to. This is not a very good place to have a religion and politics section. It would be better on a site that actually cared about having a discussion site for the sake of having a discussion site. The problem is, that there is a solid community here with a solid "subculture" for lack of a better word, and it has its own unique appeal. A shame that people are as sad and small-minded as they tend to be in terms of not being able to tolerate open discussion and diversity of beliefs, but I don't hold it against the business entity for acting in their own best interests.

[Lakersbake]

Start at page 13
http://files.shareholder.com/downloa...096/filing.pdf

and related companies

http://libertyinteractive.com/asset-list.aspx


Think about this for a min

You operate an online and retail merchandising conglomerate company sistered with a media company.

You goal is to increase sales of merchandise with these companies.

One of these companies has a forum. You appreciate the traffic of this forum as it brings visibility to your site. However that traffic represents a very very small percentage of your actual customers.

Now a sub forum of this site has even a smaller percent, however some of the langue and conversation on this forum is so offensive to some potential customers, that it might cause you to lose more customers than the traffic it creates gains.

Why on earth should a company trying to sell retail merchandise be a "free speech" destination for debate that could cause them to lose sales?

I wonder if that's why the firearms crew got locked.

[gachase21]

Adding to my above post - don't forget that company is also trying to sell add space to many companies on their shows and networks.


Overall of you don't like this forum, buy a server, set up you own site with a forum, and have at it

[gachase21]

I wonder if that's why the firearms crew got locked.

????

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...91&pagenumber=

[Lakersbake]

????

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...91&pagenumber=

Oh nvm then. I was in another one that got locked, must have been dual threads.

[gachase21]

Oh nvm then. I was in another one that got locked, must have been dual threads.

maybe they were just hiding it and didn't want you there

[Aggressivebrah]

If you can do it without resorting to slurs/various spellings of slurs or making threats, sure.

I could use a little more clarification on this. A few days ago, I had made a thread—which quickly turned into multiple controversial topics—in the Religion and Politics section that was removed sometime either yesterday or today.

There were at least a few derogative posts from others; however, I avoided those altogether while trying to foster a thread with some friendly debate. I knew others were treading on thin ice with their posts, but I made sure to focus on debunking faulty ideas, not attacking the individual.

I do, of course, have a general idea of why it was removed. It's just that your post kind of confuses me now. I would like to be able to introduce controversial topics to be openly discussed in the future, all of which I want to follow the forum rules without having threads removed if I'm able to help it.

[spadelexus]

Ziobot and CXC are both explainable for being trolls.

_Adam_ and Mehdi84 on the other hand are not. If it weren't for some of their posts, including Kahoona's, I would not be able to follow the events happening over there. So yes, I do find it shocking when I see that Mehdi84 created a thread about the #48kMarch, only to see it deleted and him banned. Then this morning, I notice a bunch of the active pro-Palestinian posters are banned. I'll let everyone else decide for themselves instead of speculating further on everyone's behalf.

As a long time bodybuilding.com customer, I would like to know what exactly the shareholders complained about. Are their names public information and have they made a public statement. Are they willing to? If not, that's their right of course, but so is my right to take my business elsewhere.

I saw it go down last night. You are overthinking things.

Around the time the rules were updated, I noticed my post count was decreasing and rep/negs in my CP had a bunch of black N/A's next to thread titles... Didn't take but a few seconds for me to realize something was going down.... Then I noticed the updated rules in two distinct areas on the R/P section .... hmmmm .... It looks like they are really trying to get a point across .... Than Mehdi started a thread and got banned... Than literally like 2 minutes later, Trance started a thread and got banned...

ZB was prolly the first pro-Israel poster to start a thread since the rule change. Do you see any other pro-Israel threads on page 1??? Yesterday there was 20... Hmmm...

It makes sense though. Regardless of political affiliation. This site is a business. We are just "visitors" ..

[MuzzieChik786]

Trance is banned? O_o

Huh, who wud've thunk it...

Interdasting.

[Renegade83]

I think in general this whole sub-forum doesn't fit with bb.com's biz model. I own an advertising business and I sure as hell wouldn't want the R/P cesspool to taint my customer base. In the old days before BB.com went big it was the wild west and no one cared, but now the Admin has to answer to the people up top.

The price you pay for making it big.

[Harbinger]

We should all buy shares in Liberty Interactive (Stock price: LINTA (NASDAQ) $28.92 -0.41 (-1.40%)) and demand fewer rules.

[gachase21]

We should all buy shares in Liberty Interactive (Stock price: LINTA (NASDAQ) $28.92 -0.41 (-1.40%)) and demand fewer rules.

Good luck on getting anywhere close to a significant ownership stake enough to voice anything

[Harbinger]

Good luck on getting anywhere close to a significant ownership stake enough to voice anything

The price has been dropping all day. Who knows, maybe it's a coup.