Logical fallacy ToS clause addition about site-policy HOT 9 CLOSED

The problem here is that, quite often, people who use logical fallacies don't even know the name for what they're doing and may even think that they're making a valid argument.

While this idea is well-intentioned, it has so much potential for unintended consequences and disproportionate response that, were it to be adopted, I'd start considering a move to BitBucket or GitLab... if not for my own protection, to ensure I can maintain the level of forgiveness I desire for my own users.

from site-policy.

@codegecko By codifying banning the use of logical fallacies, it's easier to close a discussion, issue, or PR, due to breach of ToS

You can employ a Code of Conduct to your repositories, so you can close them by violation of your repository code of conduct. See the GitHub article:

1. Adding a code of conduct to your project

from site-policy.

The problem is that, by disallowing logical fallacies, you target the mechanism, regardless of intent.

Better to try to target the intent, regardless of mechanism, by making it against the ToS to do something such as "actively incite discord to non-constructive ends". (IANAL, so I'm sure someone more skilled could come up with a better phrasing.)

EDIT: After all, trolling is the art of riling people up. You don't need logical fallacies to do that. In fact, the best trolls don't employ logical fallacies. Instead, they pretend to be genuinely oblivious or obstinate about things that people are entitled to disagree on.

This is a big enough thing that there are image macros about it built around the phrase "Not sure if trolling or just stupid"

from site-policy.

Hell, let's make "submitting buggy pull requests" against the ToS. Or maybe "utterly misguided issue tickets."

from site-policy.

So, my view on this is in the mindset of "Rule 14": "do not fight with trolls, it means that they win".

By codifying banning the use of logical fallacies, it's easier to close a discussion, issue, or PR, due to breach of ToS, rather than have to spend time educating the opposing party as to why their argument is tautologically flawed. It's an easy way to avoid "Rule 14" issues on contentious topics.

from site-policy.

I like this improvement. Hopefully Github has lawyers that can parse this intent :-)

from site-policy.

let's make it a bannable offense to be uninformed about something

from site-policy.

I think the general consensus here is that (1) owners of individual repositories or projects are already empowered and (2) banning trolling is more intuitive and less prone to banning people we'd like to keep than banning logical fallacies.

So we either closer this and mark as already done, or we can trolling. What is the consensus if those were the only options?

from site-policy.

Fair enough. Happy to close.

from site-policy.