Why is ancient politics and religion off limits?

[Dubious Pie]

I can understand having recent politics off limits, but why is ancient Roman politics disallowed? It is not exactly a "charged topic". For the same reason, will someone really start a flame war over the Greek pantheon? I mean no disrespect, I am just curious about the thought behind this.

[Maximum Zersk]

With religion, many people still practice old religions, so of course it'd be off-limits.

With politics, there's a chance that some things may be tied too closely to modern politics, or still have some influence on modern day event. Mind you, I'm guessing here, but that may be a reason.

[Mystic Muse]

With religion, many people still practice old religions, so of course it'd be off-limits.

With politics, there's a chance that some things may be tied too closely to modern politics, or still have some influence on modern day event. Mind you, I'm guessing here, but that may be a reason.

I'm thinking this is exactly it. You bring up how one ancient society does something and then somebody will probably bring up how a current society does that as well and might lead to flaming of those societies which of course leads to infractions.

And people do still practice ancient religions, even the less well known ones, so they're a banned topic too.

I've looked over the rules and I'd like to congratulate the mods on making them so clear and knowing what the banned topics almost inevitably lead to.

[Talkkno]

I'm thinking this is exactly it. You bring up how one ancient society does something and then somebody will probably bring up how a current society does that as well and might lead to flaming of those societies which of course leads to infractions.
.

You could say the same for history though, and that is allowed discussion topic.

[Mystic Muse]

You could say the same for history though, and that is allowed discussion topic.

It's less likely with something as broad as "history" though considering just how many topics there are that don't have to go anywhere near politics territory.

[Talkkno]

In addendum to answer the OP's question, it seems that ancient politics and religion are ok to discuss within a context of a video game, I remember someone doing a Crusader Kings , EU3, and Hearts of Iron Let's play for example

[Maximum Zersk]

Yes, religion and politics are okay if they're in a fictional story, like you can talk about the gods in Percy Jackson, but only as characters.

[Killer Angel]

I can understand having recent politics off limits, but why is ancient Roman politics disallowed? It is not exactly a "charged topic". For the same reason, will someone really start a flame war over the Greek pantheon? I mean no disrespect, I am just curious about the thought behind this.

As explained by others, it's too easy to start flaming.
Roman Politic and History? how high are the chances of discussing those, and then making correlation with the actual situation (military and politic strategy) in the middle-east?
Old real Religions? leaving aside that some of'em are actually practiced (northern pantheon, etc), the risk is similar, with peoples belittling religion in general, etc.

Better to leave them alone.

[Talkkno]

Roman Politic and History?

I've already noted that history is ok a topic to discuss though.

[Evil DM Mark3]

Politics are always interwoven. The Roman empire was a major inspiration for the Fascist regimes of Germany and Italy for example.

[Yora]

In my experience, it's cultural standard mostly limited to the United States, that it's a taboo to talk about politics and religion. Other cultures might regard it as censorship.
But since the admins of a forum can decide what rules are in place on their own site, we have to accept this.

[Deth Muncher]

Because Rich says no?

Seriously, I mean, yeah, okay, not being able to discuss certain things can be a pain sometimes, but when it boils down to it, it just comes down to: You can't do it because the guy in charge says no. You shrug, you get back to posting Pokemon Let's Plays or your revision of the Samurai or Monk class. :smallbiggrin:

[Evil DM Mark3]

Because Rich says no?

I suppose this is what it all boils down to. I have come across stranger rules. For instance for a while Katanas where a no go topic on the WotC forums.

[Morph Bark]

I suppose this is what it all boils down to. I have come across stranger rules. For instance for a while Katanas where a no go topic on the WotC forums.

Which was because it easily led to heated arguments and flame wars. If katanas were much more closely linked with religion and politics somehow, they'd probably still be banned as a topic.

[Deth Muncher]

Heh. Katanas were probably banned due to the copypasta associated therewith.

[Om]

With religion, many people still practice old religions, so of course it'd be off-limitsWho's worshipping Ra these days? And how many flaming arguments have raged over Sulla and Gaius Marius? Ancient history is ancient history


Politics are always interwoven. The Roman empire was a major inspiration for the Fascist regimes of Germany and Italy for example.It is hardly impossible to have a discussion on the rise of Rome without referencing the invasion of Poland...


I've already noted that history is ok a topic to discuss thoughIt is impossible to discuss history without making some mention of politics or religion. Try starting a thread on the Crusades or, to be topical, the Russian Revolution

[Shhalahr Windrider]

Who's worshipping Ra these days?
Ra specifically? Apparently no-one, according to Wikipedia. But Ra is hardly the only ancient god out there.


It is hardly impossible to have a discussion on the rise of Rome without referencing the invasion of Poland...

It is impossible to discuss history without making some mention of politics or religion. Try starting a thread on the Crusades or, to be topical, the Russian Revolution
Funny you should bring up the Crusades. I was just going to mention those as something that certain people in my part of the world see a bit of relevance on in regards to certain hot-button military endeavors over the past nine or so years. Just because it is ancient doesn’t mean it doesn’t have any effect today.

[happyturtle]

Let's say I invite everyone to my house for the evening, and I cordially request that everyone refrain from discussing monkies.

Does it really matter whether I have a good reason for that or not? A cautious inquiry into my reasons may be acceptable, but spending the evening trying to convince me that monkey discussion should be allowed would be presumptuous.

It's The Giant's house here. Let's respect his decision on this.

[Serpentine]

Who's worshipping Ra these days?Maybe not Ra, but certainly Isis, or Thor.

[Eldan]

I've known one guy who identified himself as an Odin worshiper. I'm still not sure whether he was serious or not, but he certainly knew a lot about ancient religion.

[bluewind95]

I think it's a fair thing. I mean... how ancient is ancient enough to not be relevant today?

And if it's relevant today, due to the nature of such topics, people will have strong opinions on them. Maybe not all, but enough so that someone here on this forum will. And if someone does have a strong opinion, one side is likely to get hurt. And then react defensively. And lead to all sorts of unpleasantness, which is not wanted here. In fact, I daresay the lack of such unpleasantness is part of what makes this forum so different and so... well... nice. And that is in good part due to the rules and the mods/admins that enforce them.

[LightsOnNo1Home]

It's much easier for the mods to police a blanket ban, and the rules get to be much simpler.

"No politics. No religion" is far clearer an easier to understand than a page of guidelines full of ifs and maybes. Saves on moderator time too, and makes the forum moderation more consistent, as no judgement calls are having to be made.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: I've posted on this at greater length before, but the top reasons boil down to: 1) that's how Rich wants it; 2) a blanket ban is much easier to administer and follow; 3) those topics do lead to flamewars with unacceptable frequency and certainty.