No religion.

un1x · 05-30-2016, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LinusStallman

Please add religion to the banned items in LQ Rules.

Quoted from LQ Rules:
"There is no advertising allowed in the forums." -- A certain LQ member advertises a religion in his signature.

Quoted from LQ Rules:
"Do not post any messages that are obscene..." -- I find religion obscene (offensive to the mind).

i found this post helpful

szboardstretcher · 05-30-2016, 01:37 PM

Quote:

And how does cultural indoctrination, political indoctrination or national indoctrination differ from religious indoctrination? Is state-ism any different, less harmful, more true than theism, really? Is the teaching of civic responsibility inherently different from teaching of {insert moral system here} responsibility?

Well - the end result of Political/National indoctrination are different from religious indoctrination because me and 2000 people can walk up to the congress and demand change of a written law or practice. Also we can write the person that made the law that is bothering us. There is a face to the problem that can be talked to directly. We also have the ability to vote out the party or persons causing the fervor. We can change society and the culture moving forward, because governments can be toppled and people are able to learn not to do that again. See 'Germany' for more info.

If me and 2000 people have a problem with a commandment in the bible, we don't have anywhere to go to ask for it to be changed. It took the Catholic church hundreds of years to apologize for burning scientists. And aside from the pope interpreting what is there, ie whether this/that people go to hell or do not go to hell, I don't think they've ever changed anything in the bible to help society or culture move forward - because it is the unalterable word of an invisible abrahamic sun god.

linustalman · 05-30-2016, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alberich

It is good that you have the 'someone' in it. Otherwise I would think it would be really embarrassing. And I see it in quite some forums.

Concerning the offensiveness of your signature to me:

It is good for you that you are one of the first 500.000 registrated GNU/Linux users. That reflects to me how it is important for you to compare yourself with others and pronounce you are under the 'first' of some kind. To me that transporte will to achieve social status and communicate it to the audience too.

Your signature for me is on the other hand a good example of social indoctrination, convergence and assimilation:

Stating two rules that seem to be important in this forum. Surely restating rules that are set from above and are valid in a group will be looked upon benevolently from above and from the group, and thus again can be expected to increase your social status

I interpret you are a person who is very obedient of social rules and rituals. And for a widespread type of this character often also for in whatever social frameset someone moves.

This convergence and willingness to assimilate to whatever the group does in my viewpoint (refering to Konrad Lorenz here) is a central problem of civilization.

Because it reinforces any social trend, also faulty trends. A good example is fascism.

This part of a signature I find also offensive: 'He took a duck in the face at two hundred and fifty knots.' because it's graphic. OK just kidding, actually I think it's funny.

'Copying is an act of love'. I find offensive too, because it attacks copyrights that are there for a good reason. For examply I 'publish' some pictures also from time to time and wouldn't want them to be appropriated by someone.

Then I find signatures offensive altogether because they take up so much space. And some are pretentious.

Still I find them acceptable as a personal note, all in all.

Wow, that's a lot of presumptuous rambling sarcasm by you.

alberich · 05-30-2016, 02:35 PM

Sarcasm? Where? I did answer your question thouroughly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LinusStallman

You find every signature alone on this page offensive? Really?

Now you call it rambling. Maybe it is, probably it's presumptuous too. Anyway it's my feedback.

linustalman · 05-30-2016, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alberich

Sarcasm? Where? I did answer your question thouroughly. Now you call it rambling. Maybe it is, probably it's presumptuous too. Anyway it's my feedback.

It's peppered with sarcasm.

alberich · 05-30-2016, 02:41 PM

I call that a view from the distance and critical, also towards social mechanisms. I think sarcasm is something else. From how I understand sarcasm. I tried to keep a dry style of descrription here.

linustalman · 05-30-2016, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy

Thanks for the feedback. We have no plans to put a blanket ban on religion (or other topics) in the General forum. We highly value free speech and would like for LQ members to be able to engage in thoughtful and civil discourse on topics of their choosing. That said, members have noticed religion slipping into technical threads and the consensus seems to be against that happening. Happy to hear feedback on this, but if it's an issue members think should be addressed we will do so.

Note that advertising is (and has been) acceptable in .sigs, which can be disabled and do not show to guests/search engines.

--jeremy

Hi Jeremy.

I ask again.

Please clarify -- the LQ Rules says advertising is not allowed -- it never mentions the sig being an exception. Does this mean all types of advertising (even commercial) is allowed in sigs?

Thanks.

linustalman · 05-30-2016, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alberich

I call that a view from the distance and critical, also towards social mechanisms. I think sarcasm is something else. From how I understand sarcasm. I tried to keep a dry style of descrription here.

A dry wit?

alberich · 05-30-2016, 02:47 PM

My english is not so brilliant. Maybe sarcasm means something different over there than here. I know I was very confrontional and also making assumptions and interpretations. Which can be called even presumptuous, maybe unfair. But I think my view is founded, at least when considering social behaviour in general. If my interpretations towards you are wrong.

Anyway social status is more or less important for all of us. And in excess that can bring inefficiencies.

You can deactivate showing of signatures here:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...do=editoptions

Ctrl-F 'signature' (OK, you knew that)

jefro · 05-30-2016, 09:41 PM

Can't you let the person live like they wish?
You don't need to "Buy" the religion that they are "Selling" do you?

Randicus Draco Albus · 05-31-2016, 01:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by szboardstretcher

Well - the end result of Political/National indoctrination are different from religious indoctrination because me and 2000 people can walk up to the congress and demand change of a written law or practice.

And the government will obediently change said law, because 2000 people demand it and ignore the wishes of the other millions? Yes happens every week.

Quote:

Also we can write the person that made the law that is bothering us.

Actually, you would write your letter to your local representative's office. And of course, that person would read your letter personally and take your request to the cabinet. In the real world, you would never be sent a form letter thanking you for your correspondence or be ignored by the people in government. That kind of thing only happens in movies.

Quote:

There is a face to the problem that can be talked to directly. We also have the ability to vote out the party or persons causing the fervor. We can change society and the culture moving forward, because governments can be toppled and people are able to learn not to do that again.

Perfect example of indoctrination. We are free and in our system the people have the power. (It was difficult to read this part of your post, while rolling on the floor laughing.)

Quote:

If me and 2000 people have a problem with a commandment in the bible, we don't have anywhere to go to ask for it to be changed.

If you do not like part of Beowulf, where would you go to ask to have it changed? (And your analogy is a bad one. If people do not agree with the commandments of a faith, they should look for another faith, not try to change the one they disagree with. Your example is analogous with members of a political party wanting to change the part of the party's platform they disagree with. It is not analogous with a few of the peasants demanding a change in a particular law, because they do not like it. Regardless of what everyone else thinks.)

Randicus Draco Albus · 05-31-2016, 02:07 AM

Quote:

LinusStallman
GNU/Linux User #470660 Get counted!

If someone aids you or you like what's posted then please click 'Add to Reputation' button on lower left of post (next to Tux).

If issue is fixed then please post what solved it and mark your thread as Solved (goto Thread Tools drop-down menu at upper right).

And you complain about the signatures others use? Another person pleading in his or her signature for other members to increase his or her reputation. If reputation is important to you and you want it to increase it, make helpful posts. Begging for reputation makes the people who do it look bad and annoys many others. And who are you to demand anyone else gets counted? Proselytising the religion of Linux is no different than proselytising the religion of Christianity or the religion of nationalism. It is time to pull your head out of your hypocritical behind and try to live peacefully with others.

jamison20000e · 05-31-2016, 02:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ser Olmy

By definition, one man's religion is another man's blasphemy.

+1 +

Let's send all the "freedom fighters" and "terrorists" off,,, that's all! (Or, you "wish!"

)

I agree:

Quote:

Originally Posted by LinusStallman

...
I take it back and was wrong to suggest that religion should be banned outright on the forums --
...

if GNU\Linux\*** is a (better) religion (fits,) many signatures (or userNames) would be banned.

(Tho, I guess not from this church? JK too smart.+\-)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardvark71

Hi...

But out of them all, there can be only one ...

Regards...

No; +\plus\"heaven" becomes -\minus\"hell" and back again as it turns...

[edit]Only made it to page-2, figured I should hit post before(, some of you know?).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emerson

I've changed my signature. Am I in violation now?
___________________
Religions, the only ethical doctrines available to everyone during millenniums.

systemd - no
pulseaudio - no

No, just not taking into account when your wrong your wrong. Teach them to be shameful-devils their your kids who cares, I guess?

Quote:

Originally Posted by szboardstretcher

This is worth mentioning again! I scour the zero-reply posts every day looking to help anyone that fell through the cracks. And so many of them get pulled out of that list with unhelpful or anecdotal replies. Thanks for pointing this out.

I was going to say "And, thank yous for the help. :)" but hit the "Yes" instead of the hourglass on accident.

Take things how WE will or not![/edit]

jamison20000e · 05-31-2016, 03:14 AM

I need to remember it's a forum not a word processor.

Have Fun!

sundialsvcs · 05-31-2016, 01:10 PM

I suggest that the rule should be (and, already is ...) "Thou shalt not discuss religion except on the Faith & Religion Mega-Thread," which, judging from its longevity and number-of-posts, remains one of the most popular water-coolers :hatttip: I've seen anywhere.

Except for one religious commandment, obviously:

Quote:

I. THOU SHALT HAVE NO OPERATING SYSTEMS BEFORE LINUX.

Speaking personally, I also think that the F&R-MT is great fun! I appreciate the fact that the "mods" have permitted it to happen.