Would it be so bad if Fluther was more?

[mod says] This question has been moved to Meta.

What is it you can’t discuss and debate here? People seem to talk about their ideals, ideologies and beliefs about everything including topics relating to sex, drugs, politics and religion. I’m not sure what the ‘more’ is you’re looking for? There seem to be plenty of superficial questions but Fluther’s history shows a whole range of more controversial (and heated) discussions on a much deeper range of topics.

Yes. It would be so bad if Fluther were no more.

Bad, and incredibly sad, for me. I know of no other similar site, but, then again, it’s been awhile since I searched.

Fluther should be freaking endowed, given it’s history!!

JK, I wasn’t even here then.

Honestly, just go to reddit and or Quora if you get bored here.

The well is sort of low here and the most repairs we get are a few cobble stones to patch the rough spots but there’s great people here, which is why I haven’t fully committed to Quora or Reddit as a user.

I think Fluther can be “more” if people stop getting offended so easily and think of a “controversial” question in a different angle.

yawn…

Fluther is what each jelly chooses to make it.

Fluther is plenty :]

There are no topics that are too controversial for Fluther. Now, it is true that how one broaches a topic is important. Some questions are asked in such a way as to make rational and productive discourse nearly impossible. But that is not the same as banning the topic itself. It is simply a requirement that one ask a reasonable question in order to receive reasonable answers.

Note that most ways of asking a question poorly are also logically deficient in some way. Questions loaded with presuppositions, for instance, are considered fallacious when those presuppositions are objectionable.

@Hypocrisy_Central It sounds like you miss @ETPro. I miss him, too. He sparked a lot of good discussions about important topics. Sadly, the kind of question that you describe is now defined as “pushing an agenda” (though some jellies still seem to get away with this regularly), and is against the rules.

@SavoirFaire There are no topics that are too controversial for Fluther.
Oh, yes there is, I have seen enough in the archives, and they were not all mine.

Some questions are asked in such a way as to make rational and productive discourse nearly impossible.
Some questions that seem to do such cannot be asked any other way and still hold the punch and clarity the question was supposed to have.

It is simply a requirement that one ask a reasonable question in order to receive reasonable answers.
One man’s “reasonable”, can be “controversial” to another or many more.

@dappled_leaves @Hypocrisy_Central It sounds like you miss @ETPro. I miss him, too. He sparked a lot of good discussions about important topics.
I would not say I miss him specifically, though I did not agree with a lot of his philosophy, he did have questions that made me go “uuuuuummmmm…..”. There were others in the past as well, but they have seem to gone elsewhere.

Sadly, the kind of question that you describe is now defined as “pushing an agenda” (though some jellies still seem to get away with this regularly), and is against the rules.
Well, anything that rattles the cage or someone gets indignant because they see themselves in the question and thus feel attacked will more than likely pull the ”agenda card”; then what you have left is lukewarm, generic questions.

@Hypocrisy_Central There are no topics in the archives, only questions (which themselves concern topics). I have no doubt that there are plenty of questions in the archives that were asked in such a way as to have been rejected by the moderators. But that in no way proves that the topic itself is off-limits. It just means that one has to be careful about how it is broached. If you disagree, PM me a topic that you think is off-limits and I will send you back an acceptable question on that topic.

As for “punch,” any question that relies on controversial wording for its impact is inherently flawed. It is likely to be either a loaded question or else otherwise fallacious. A good question doesn’t make people squirm, it makes them think—and with any luck, it is the thinking that makes them squirm. But just asking something to rattle someone’s cage is lazy and sloppy. When the wording of the question is objectionable, it allows the subject to become the asking of the question itself rather than the topic the question was supposed to be about. That’s not how one generates a productive discourse.

Finally, I don’t see why you think that “reasonable” and “controversial” are antonyms. The point I was making is that there is a difference between a question that raises a controversy because it broaches a difficult topic and a question that raises a controversy because it is asked poorly. The first sort of question can still be reasonable. The second kind, however, typically is not. A question that is poorly phrased will usually rest on bad assumptions, which make a reasonable answer impossible to give without first wading through and correcting the erroneous basis for asking. This is why one must ask a reasonable question before getting a reasonable answer.

This is not to deny that there are people who find reason controversial. Some do—usually those who aren’t very good at it. But a question can be deemed both reasonable and controversial at the same time. It is the questions that are controversial because they are unreasonable that ought to be pulled by the moderators.

@SavoirFaire If you disagree, PM me a topic that you think is off-limits and I will send you back an acceptable question on that topic.
I am sure if I looked a can find a question that made it through on just about every topic, though some might be years, and years ago. Of the questions that did make it through, or of such that today would be modded, the answers or comments were less than helpful because it was more on the question’s validity, or right to be asked or the OP than addressing the gist of the question, but next time I am in the achieves and I find one, I will certainly point it out.