..."most active" is not necessarily the same as "most popular".

If a poll were to be posted in GD and/or Lounge, asking what is your favorite group (i.e. most popular), I would bet that this group would not be #1.

I justify my nitpick because you, sir, have made the point that words matter (and I agree).

At the micro level it isn’t that hard to spot, even within this thread.

...and I wasn't even thinking of that perspective, but none the less, it's so true...so true.

I'm using the number of posts to measure popularity. Check my link to see the second most popular group.

...I was in a snarky mood, my apologies.

Because I see far more of that than anything else. I have seen a few theist posters here who simply stopped posting.

But yes, an open group that accepts all points of view would be a good thing.

And understood.

from believers and nonbelievers alike.

It is not a safe haven for people to feel comfortable and unchallenged.
We have those as well on DU.

You are constantly challenging the positions of atheist here.
Should we accuse you of not making it a place where atheists feel comfortable?

The Interfaith Group is a safe haven group. As such, criticism, disagreement, awkward questions and the like are not tolerated. Here is the SOP of the Interfaith Group:

A safe haven that provides opportunities for people of all faiths, spiritual leanings and non-belief to discuss religious topics and events in a positive and civil manner, with an emphasis on tolerance. Criticisms of individual beliefs or non-belief, or debates about the existence of higher power(s) are not appropriate in this group.

But you know that.
So, with that safe haven available for atheists, if they do not like my questions, and they do not like my pointing out that humans are intolerant, these atheists could simply post on the atheist group, and post the exact same articles free from questioning that makes them uncomfortable.


There you go.

You said, "...an open group that accepts all points of view would be a good thing." Such a group already exists as a safe haven group, and you do not participate there. Why is that, Gil?

Others do not. I go there very rarely, and post there almost never. I don't need agreement, and prefer being challenged in my thinking. I suspect that you read in the atheists and agnostics group far more often than I do. Why, I can't imagine, though.

Explain that, if you can. Or just stick to the topic. This thread is this thread. I will not let you hijack it.

This part:

Numbers don't lie.

As to hijacking threads, read any of my posts about Chinese authoritarians and explain about hijacking.

So is your baseless accusation metaphor or hyperbole this time?

That's rude.

And the actual accusation against me of being a troll?

Is that rude?


If what you describe as hijacking is rude, I can point out the guilty parties if you wish by linking here to many examples.

And then we can talk about the lack of dialogue.

Please do not hijack my thread. Take your vendetta elsewhere, please. Thanks.

And I provided 2 examples of extreme rudeness. Unfortunately for this post, it was theists being attacked.

One being your own reply.

Ironic, is it not?

would hide all comments below theirs.

Just ignore them; they're just trolling:

Trolling – (verb), as it relates to internet, is the deliberate act, (by a Troll – noun or adjective), of making random unsolicited and/or controversial comments on various internet forums with the intent to provoke an emotional knee jerk reaction from unsuspecting readers to engage in a fight or argument.

Not sayings yours is an example of that, but you know, just sayin’.

I can cite more if you like.

But calling someone a troll is not dialogue, it is designed to attack a fellow member.

It’s also a bit weak coming from the most prolific name caller in this group.

It’s just another example of trolling.

Is that what you meant?

Here's to the Religion Group.

I can’t wait for, ‘I know you are but what am I?’

Haven’t heard that one in decades.

Up thread. It was not decades ago, not even a decade of minutes.

It's funny how you go off on people for some imagined slight and make it real.

Start your own thread, please. This one is about praise for the Religion Group. Do you not like this group?

Is that not the point?

Still, the Religion Group is the most active and most popular DU Group, which was my point. I think it's because anyone can post here about religion without being blocked from the group. It's not a "protected group," and that's a good thing. It is really the only place on DU where religious topics can be discussed freely from all perspectives.

It's much needed, which is why it's so active. Discussions about religions have an important place on a site that is primarily about politics, because religion affects politics. Only an open forum where all points of view are welcomed can serve that need. I know that is stressful for some, but those folks have plenty of protected groups to use. The Religion Group is the only open discussion area with religion as its topic.

As demonstrated above, but over a long timeline it shows engagement. And all that with almost no moderation, that's the interesting part.

For theists or atheists being made uncomfortable, the pendulum swings back and forth, but I remember starting here actually trying to keep a positive dialogue going and that ended fast. Theists here don't tent to engage in good faith arguments, and many of them have been removed as trolls.

Here's to a new year in thivery active group!

...awhile back, I collected a set of data from the DU Religion Group (RG) for two individuals of, shall we say for convenience, divergent points of view relative to the group's topical focus.

Let's call them Poster A and Poster B.

So between March 2017 and June 11, 2018, these two individuals created a total of 435 original posts (OPs).
Which resulted in net values of 801,249 views, 13,289 replies and 1,137 Recommendations (RECs), all as of Jun 11, 2018.

Poster A had: 372 OPs which generated 732,196 views, 12,575 replies and 744 RECs.

Poster B had: 63 OPs which generated 69,053 views, 714 replies and 393 RECs.

Question, which one would you say was more "popular" in RG for that time frame?

You may reply in essay form.



Almost forgot to add, activity of discussion doesn't necessary equate to popularity, or dare I say, agreement let alone acceptance of a given topic:

(sorted by total number of replies in the last 2,400 OPs in the DU RG)

Just sayin'

so I would say that to go with what I said.

May I suggest a comma, or a rephrase, to clear up possible ambiguities?

Otherwise, not being able to limit discussion on prohibiting discussion, might mean ....

Here's what it actually says:

"limiting discussion to prohibit disagreement"

I don't see any ambiguity in that.

for being the "fuel" for much of the activity here. MineralMan starts numerous threads, spawning discussion. Here's what his DU profile shows:

Favorite group: Religion, 1483 posts in the last 90 days (41% of total posts)

guillaumeb also starts many threads, but he also must be the greatest contrarian in the history of the Religion group. Not only does he tirelessly counter many theists here, he sparks myriad responses. Here's what his DU profile indicates:

Favorite group: Religion, 1417 posts in the last 90 days (45% of total posts)


There are, of course, many other contributors to the Religion group. But if MM and guillaumeb stopped posting here tomorrow, the traffic would nosedive. Of that, I am convinced.

arguing back and forth endlessly count as "popular"?

Popular has to do with the number of posts in the group. That's the only thing measured at the link I provided. It reflects user activity, which is a common measure of popularity in discussion forums.

It seems to me that popularity would be measured by the number of participants.

And yet, here you are, participating in my thread. Welcome!

I count 14 individual participants in this thread, which has just 61 posts. I may have missed one or two, since I just counted by looking at the post list quickly.

Some, I recognize as regular participants in this group. Others don't seem to be names I see all the time in threads here.

That seems to be a good number of posters in this single thread, don't you think?

In the thread just before this one from only two people. But Im sure you understood my point all along.

I don't keep track of such things. Perhaps you might want to investigate further and report back what you discover.