2

The code of conduct of stack exchange says that

We don’t tolerate any language likely to offend or alienate people based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion — and those are just a few examples. 

As part of an answer or a question, if I post some statements made by Shankara (say) on the Buddha (say), there is a great chance of offending many Buddhists. (I am not posting them here). So also, there are many examples where darshana X and darshana Y have made derogatory comments against each other and posting such comments might violate the above policy.

How to handle such situations? Is it possible to always follow the code of conduct?

Addendum

If I quote a verse from scripture X saying that god 1 was born from god 2, I can foresee followers of god 1 getting offended. And vice versa. Should we then stop quoting such scriptural statements?

1
  • 1
    @SK I don't know if it is the "same thing". I have no interest in discussing about wars or groups here. – user17987 Mar 16 '20 at 2:07
0

If you are merely answering a question of the form:

  • What did acharya X think of Y and their philosophy?
  • Did X really say <something really offensive> about Y?

...then the CoC doesn't apply.

The CoC only comes into play when a user takes the offensive stuff X had said about Y in their commentary and starts using it against current day followers of Y in comments and chat.

If I quote a verse from scripture X saying that god 1 was born from god 2, I can foresee followers of god 1 getting offended. And vice versa. Should we then stop quoting such scriptural statements?

It doesn't matter what some users think of your arguments and references. To quote from this post:

If you want your writing on the site preserved:

  • ask a curious question or

  • write a supported answer.

7
  • In that case, here at HSR the SE CoC is mainly observed in the breach – iruvar Mar 17 '20 at 21:53
  • I don't think it's a breach of CoC to document a certain aspect of Hinduism. According to this meta post, this site is about Hinduism. A feminist may find questions like this and this offensive but that should not stop someone from posting an answer to those from the Hindu perspective. I view this or any other SE site as a knowledge base, so I want to know the good, bad and ugly. @iruvar – sv. Mar 17 '20 at 22:46
  • I'm do not refer to the objective and neutral reporting of scriptural contents in answers, as objectionable as they may seem in the eyes of some. The subsequent vigorous defending of those contents in comments (and in some instances within the answers themselves) strays into CoC violation territory IMO. For instance in a comment war yesterday Sati was staunchly defended on grounds of it being "voluntary" on the part of the woman and not undertaking it depriving her of the opportunity to attain Swarga.... – iruvar Mar 17 '20 at 23:15
  • ..whereas a cursory examination of the reality of Sati in India reveals the true picture as to what fraction of cases are voluntary. There is one particular commentator whose one purpose in life appears to be patrolling these corridors so as to pounce upon anyone that offends his doctrinal sensibilities. I also believe it was a mistake on the part of SE to have opened these SEs on religion - major contributors to these sites also happen to be zealous believers that find it hard to draw the line between faith and objectivity – iruvar Mar 17 '20 at 23:24
  • 1
    Another user expressed the same concerns and one community moderator said: "it's the internet - and what you're asking is unenforceable." @iruvar – sv. Mar 17 '20 at 23:27
  • 1
    wow and that question received net 8 negative votes! As to inability to enforce, the moderators seem to be doing a good enough job of muzzling SK – iruvar Mar 17 '20 at 23:40
  • 2
    @iruvar i think some people intentionally troll here. not worth spoiling your peace of mind. – user17987 Mar 18 '20 at 12:14

You must log in to answer this question.