Make logic part of forum rules somehow

[lIceColon]

I made this suggestion jokingly in flood a while back, but in light of "Enough is enough" by Saronsen (2014) I think there seriously needs to be some special promotion of "logic" in the Discovery Community, at least when players are giving feedback to devs so that people are actually offering meaningful criticism.
Sure colorful expressions of discontent such as the use of memes and images and certain sayings were funny the first time, but they are not a constructive way of exploring the issue, and such appeals to emotion are serious obstructions to objectivity, which matters in the serious discussion of discussion threads.
There are several sides to this: If a thread is filled with colorful language and rage and accusations, then devs can simply pass it off as trolling and admins will lock it and all the valid points made in the thread will be likely disregarded, leading to community complaining that devs don't listen. How could they, after all you're not expecting a dev to pick through crap looking for gold are you?
But if a thread and every reply to it is laid out with proper thesis, then at least logically devs will have to read and at least take into consideration since there is no room for ambiguity.
Therefore, what I am proposing is for logicality to be enforced in discussion threads, including but not limited to common sense and the common logical fallacies in some way. You can have your toxic gamer attitude in the game and RP environment, but over here on the forum forums you have to keep it logically sound.

The purpose of this thread is for discussion of the viability of this rule change/proposal, and for the people who agree with the notion to synthesize the specific rule for the admins to review.

[Hidamari]

yes please do

---

[Birdtalon]

yes please do

What you on about? Every day I see tanks with no guns driving around town!

Simple answer, no - the forum rules are fine as they are. Also this OP has too much support for the devs for my liking. We need to start another developer witch hunt soon.

---

[Binski]

Well, I consider myself quite on the up and up regarding the application of logical formulas for making proper arguments.

The problem I see is that philosophy of Logic is usually only taught at the university level and up. Younger players still in school are not likely to know anything about the difference between a logical and illogical argument, or say the definition of a valid argument vs. a sound one.

Also its going to be a lot of work for moderators to filter every post for fallacies, I mean, its hard work for university professors in the classroom environment, and they're getting paid big bucks.

However it would be good if someone did take the initiative to post a 'logic' thread listing all of the known fallacies and logical argument format for people to reference who may willingly seek it out to guide them in posting threads/responses. It might actually introduce some people to raw logic for the first time.

Most people when posting their ideas usually follow the typical 'if Q then P' format but don't even realize it, since rarely does anyone argue something for no reason at all. Whether their argument is correct, well, that then just becomes a matter of opinion anyways, even if what they say is true.

Governments don't even require logic in their assemblies, which is sad but for obvious reasons that a lot of government decisions are to suit the government and may not be logical at all. Thats why in most industrialized nations, logic is left off the books until you're in post secondary. Until then, they don't wan't people being able to out argue the authorities.

The needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few or the one is indeed a logical argument, but whether you care is a matter of individual opinion, and I find most arguments on here are just one opinion against another. So in the search for Spock, we're not likely to find him in Sirius :/

---

The Further Exploits of Captain Antares (August 2015) │ (alt) JonasHudson
*Argo | Special Operative ID (Approved Request)* | Argo Compilation Video
################ *Proposed OF Challenge System* ################
############### The Book of Piracy (Piracy Tutorial) ###############
############### Binski Alamo (Youtube Channel) ###############

[Birdtalon]

Logic isn't always the best way to approach things. Logic doesn't take emotion or morals into account.

For example; while a factual statement for reducing lag would be that "POBs should all be removed from the game to reduce lag." Logically we should remove POBs from the game to reduce the lag on the server. However logic doesn't care that 100% of the playerbase who own POBs would be seriously ticked off.

---

[Luke.]

(rofl)

Someone close this please, before OP gets burnt alive for the hypocrisy.

---

[Strichev]

Mister Unforgiven, considering your self-proclaimed mastery of logic, you yourself should care to educate this forum's denizens for the good of the community. Do note that in spite of my seemingly snarly tone I mean no harm and only wish to see your idea come to life.

Could you include dialectical logic in such a thread too? It would be sublime.

[lIceColon]

yes please do

I still stand behind that thread, and will not answer to your sad misintepretation. Besides, fact is, that thread has nothing to do with this thread, and your use of it is more is of a personal attack against me. Besides even if I am the least logical person around, may I remind you that just because the devil suggest you douse yourself in holy water doesn't make it wrong.

Logic isn't always the best way to approach things. Logic doesn't take emotion or morals into account.

Common misconceptiont - It is logical to take emotion and morality into account. They are both factors when relevant, however difficult to quantify at times.

[Birdtalon]

Common misconceptiont - It is logical to take emotion and morality into account. They are both factors when relevant, however difficult to quantify at times.

Sorry, if I was a computer then I would know that.

---