Animation Source Forums

Recently on this forum, I have been noticing that people are showing an intolerance of difference. It seems like when someone disagrees, the person being disagreed with is taking offense, as if the other person is out to get them. There are a couple different scenarios of this in which I'll identify below.

Discussion topics: These topics usually hold a multitude of different viewpoints. Yet when one person starts to take another person's opinion and try to counter it, they get accused of flaming and whatnot.

Rant topics: This problem is present in many rants. If someone replies to a rant saying something along the lines of "I don't think this is a big deal, for this reason", the person saying that starts getting accused of flaming. If the person who said that provides a reason, a conceivable reason, then the other shouldn't be acting the way they are.

The thing that irritates me the most about this is, the person who decides to take another viewpoint and prove/say why they think it's wrong, is looked upon negatively by select group as if they were flaming, bullying, etc. And it creates an atmosphere of oppression, really. If people start piling negative replies on the person challenging a point, it makes the challenger look like they are breaking the rules. And the challenger seems to be blamed if the topic gets locked, but in truth, it's the others' faults, because they can't accept their opinions being countered/challenged.

Essentially mob rule, mob rule of immaturity.

I've got to say I agree with you, on this site and off. People have got to learn to respect other people's opinions. People have a right to disagree, it irritates me when others do not accept that other peoples' views are just as important as theirs.

I agree. Members here need to learn to accept it when people disagree or have a different view about something...Frankly, it's a pretty useful tool in off-line (real) life. I mean...at some point in your life, there's going to be someone, be it at work, at school or even a friend that will disagree with you. Does this mean you have to reject their opinions rudely? Absolutely not ! You have to learn to respect the opinions and views of your peers. In other words, deal with it.

Everything that I wanted to say has been said D:

It's ridiculous. Mainly it's the pre-teens that do it. Myself, I was a fairly touchy one at 12, but outgrew it. Why? Because there comes a point when one starts to care less if one suggest something that would previously tick them off. Well, for me anyway

It's ruled the forums for a lot of the forums' life, unfortunately.

Yup, you have a point Cobalt. Everything I wanted to say has been said.

People should just suck it up and deal with the fact not everyone has the same opinion

If someone takes offense to someone,then the offended person should just log out,to blow off some steam,then come back after they have done so.

I promised myself to stay away from this topic, but what the heck; I won't be able to keep it.

In the long run you do, indeed, speak the truth. Our community seems to have a knack of making people paranoid and intolerant; this is due to the nature of the human mind. Many people wants to refuse to believe they are wrong, especially during the pre-teen and teenager years. So naturally, some of us do, indeed, take offense when someone disagrees with our views and opinions. The most obsessive nature I have seen, would perhaps be a certain member who complained about everything and never got happy, no matter what the moderators did to make him. Why? Because in his eyes, moderators were evil and selfish, and everyone who disagreed with him was a heretic that should be burned.

That's perfectly understandable; after all, we do have power. And the more power, the more likely it is that someone will abuse them. However, the situation I spoke of above was caused by jealousy and/or oppression of power.
Some people are like that; they do not wish for others to have power because it can be abused. Or they are jealous and want the same power, hoping to achieve it by oppressing the moderators.

If not completely unrelated, this example does prove that the difference between a moderator and a "normal" member is "intolerable". The same system applies for our younger members as well. Remember, children are not fully developed psychologically, or physically. Just as an eight-year-old would stick up for his friend, even if that friend did something wrong, or a thirteen-year-old would declare people disagreeing with him/her as heresy, people have different views on issues, and these views often clash.



I do believe you are demonizing children here, JerseyCaptain, of no real basis.
This is mainly a children's website, although most of our members are teens from 15 and up, so it only comes natural that a child's nature will dominate it. In difference to adults, children lack the ability to set up those "blocks" that prevents us from going haywire and looking at things in a way that is negative, no matter how the situation is. An example of the existence of this lack of ability, would be those socalled "secret cliques". In a school environment, the mobs rule. Children will gang up with the "coolest" or the "bad" because they, themselves feel insignificant at that stage. They do not want to have their own opinions, because it would perhaps make them "uncool". Now, when someone confronts someone from said gang, and voices their opinions about them, they will be beaten to pulp, because that guy or gal do not have those "blocks" that allows him/her to understand the situation properly. Therefore, he/she would take that as an offense.
Another example would be how much children fight amongst themselves, compared to adults. Once again, this is caused by the childrens' lack of "blocks" and good judgement/common sense.
It evolves as they grow.

Just relax and try not to care so much about it. We were like that once too; children without common sense or good judgement. We have all been. Let kids be kids, ya?

I must point out that the move of embracing diversity lends itself to certain abuses. Like if someone says, "I think the ruelz here stink. We shud b allowed 2 do all the mate talks and sms we want," and they get yelled at, they always seem to say, if not openly then between the lines, that it's their right to voice their view. So where does a view become unacceptable? When it damages the well-being of a member, or of the site. For example (and for the record I've never seen either of these happen as such), let's say someone brings up smoking or alchohol in the shoutbox and someone else politely explains why such things are bad for you and/or should not be discussed in the shoutbox. The view being expressed by the second person is acceptable, both because it has valid avidence and because it is a positive message to other members of the site. I know if I were a parent, I'd be very pleased to see my kid on a site where people discussed why you ought to stay away from drugs, and for my own part I would gladly spend time on sites like that myself.
On the other hand, if someone mentions here that they are African American, and someone else starts tossing around the n-word and making racist remarks. Not only are they hurting the person they're insulting, but they are turning the site into a war zone.
See the difference?

While I too would be pleased to see a good discussion of why drugs and alcohol is bad on a site such as BaltoSource, that is either not possible, or it would work against its purpose.
Remember that we have children of all age groups here (some even as young as 8, believe it or not), and talking about such issues could potentially spark that kid's curiosity to try it, despite what s/he reads or has been told by her/his parents.

I think the reason that these kinds of discussions are not widely accepted here is that most of the BaltoSource community are far from mature enough to handle the subject properly, or make the right decision about it. There are a lot of factors that could potentially reduce a kid/adolescent to start doing drugs. One of them is the internet.

Yes, I'm aware of that problem. I call it the "Law of the Brass Monkey" (if you're confussed, do not think about brass monkeys). I mainly chose that because it was an example that one could reasonably expect just about everyone to agree with. Of c ourse to take it one step further, one could try citing the example of someone explaining why it's a bad idea to discuss drugs here at all. However, I think in a logical sense that's somewhat less defensible, since one doesn't diwscard something with a great chance for good because of a small chance of bad result (one doesn't stop telling kids not to cross the street without looking just because some rebel might go and do it, does one?).