Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Personally, I've always been in favor of clear rules: It should be clearly stated what is allowed and what is not, and what actions will be taken in case of violations. But the rules should also be flexible enough to allow for discussion of any topic, but within certain limits. These limits are public morality. Everyone knows it. Let me give an example from the topic of Morality. That's the topic that started the conflict.Loken
I'm just wondering... why is it considered low and immoral?
He knew perfectly well that the topic violated moral and ethical norms. He wanted to discuss it, and I agree that it can be discussed, but without losing face. But what happened in the topic? Most of the users started making vulgar jokes, and that's exactly why it was closed. And it's not about the title or the topic of discussion, but about the level at which the discussion is conducted.
Vlad
