[Religion Moderator]

You raise a good point because it is how the terms are read and not what the words technically mean that incites flame wars.

I shall think about this and get back with all of you.

There are several factors. For instance, banned expressions must apply across the board and must be enforceable - not just by me but by other mods.

I must factor in that each Religion Forum poster may have his own idea of what is or is not truth. For example, a poster may be absolutely certain that what another poster relentlessly claims is false whereas that other poster is equally absolutely certain that what he claims is the truth and for that reason, he claims it relentlessly despite the other poster's (self) righteous protestations.

Both must be able to claim the truth (and expose the lie) as they understand it.

[Quix]

THANKS TONS.

[sitetest]

Dear Religion Moderator,

I understand what you're saying. Mind you, I'm not suggesting that you should ban the phrase “bearing false witness” when applied to posters. I'm all in favor of calling liars liars.

It's just that “bearing false witness” so clearly means at least “lying” that if the rules are to be consistent, it seems to me that you will need to ban the phrase.

sitetest

[Quix]

YOU HAVE A THANKLESS IMPOSSIBLE JOB HERDING US CATS. AND I’M THANKFUL TO THE MAX FOR ALL YOUR TIRELESS ANOINTED EFFORTS IN SO DOING.

Howver, This is one Proddy who is not really comfortable, nor happy about one aspect of such things that is CONTINUING ALSO RELENTLESSLY.

1. The complaints to you, the RM are what . . . 95% from RC’s about Proddys?

2. Over the years . . . and yet again in this instance . . . the boundaries, forbidden words and phrases etc. are essentially !!!!DEMANDED!!!! by the RC’s to be ADJUSTED toward the RC’s thin-skinned sensibilities.

3. They succeed in that effort over and over and over again.

4. This is, to me, a kind of INCRIMENTALLY SUCCESSFUL EFFORT TO TURN FR INTO A FORMAL DIRECTLY DIRECTED OFFICE OF THE VATICAN.

5. It’s a great standard to assert that the open threads are not for the thin-skinned. However, frankly, it appears that you rarely to never apply that standard to much of anyone—particularly to the RC’s who seemingly beg outrageously to be slapped up-side the head with that boundary line.

6. I would rather suffer persistent personal wrong than to have the boundaries unnecessarily narrowed, restricted.

7. I certainly am not in favor of Proddys continuing to be herded into a narrower and narrower branding chute at the successful manipulation and insistence of the RC’s however wittingly or unwittingly it transpires.