House rules

Why we have rules

Philosophy needs disagreement. It also needs people to stay in the room. These rules protect both.

They apply everywhere on the site: topics, replies, Journal essays, book reviews, profiles and private messages. Every member agrees to them when they join.

One rule sums up all the others:

Challenge ideas, never people.

The rules

1. Respect people

Treat every member as intelligent and sincere. Most disagreements here are between reasonable people who weigh things differently.

• Yes: "I think your second premise is false. Here is why."
• No: "Only a fool could believe this."

2. Challenge ideas, not people

Criticise the argument, not the person who made it. Do not guess at someone's motives, character or intelligence. A bad argument can be fixed; an insulted person usually leaves.

Before you criticise a view, state it at its strongest. If the other side would not recognise your summary, your criticism will not land.

• Yes: "That conclusion does not follow from your example."
• No: "You only say that because of your religion."

3. Treat every tradition with respect

No tradition is "primitive", "exotic" or "not real philosophy". Ubuntu, Confucian ethics, Nyāya logic and Kant all deserve a fair hearing. Criticise arguments, never peoples, cultures or faiths.

• Yes: "I am not convinced by the Madhyamaka argument against intrinsic nature, because…"
• No: "Eastern thought is just religion."

4. Show your sources, and never invent a quotation

Name the book, chapter, lecture or study you rely on, so others can check it and learn from it. Quote accurately and in context. Never make up a quotation, a date or a reference. If you are unsure, say so.

• Yes: "Hume makes this point in the Enquiry, Section IV."
• No: a famous-sounding line that the thinker never wrote, with no source.

5. Write in your own words

We want to hear how you think. AI tools may help with spelling, grammar or translation, if you say so in your post. For example: "AI helped me translate this from Urdu." AI must never write your argument, your reply or your essay. Posts that appear to be written by AI may be removed.

6. Stay on topic, and use the format

Keep replies to the question in the thread. Start a new topic for a new question; it helps the next reader find it. In a Debate, every reply takes a side, For or Against. If you partly agree, say so in your reply.

7. No spam or self-promotion

Do not advertise. Your profile is the place for your books, articles and website. Link to your own work in a post only when it directly answers the question, and say that it is yours.

8. No harassment, threats or hate

Do not threaten, bully, stalk or demean anyone. No hate speech against any group. Do not keep messaging someone who has not answered, or who has asked you to stop.

9. Protect privacy: no doxxing

Never share another person's private information. That includes their real name if they have not shared it, their address, phone number, workplace, photos or private messages. Do not pretend to be someone else.

10. Religion and politics, with care

Religion & the Sacred and Society & Politics are welcome here, and can be argued with energy. Discuss beliefs and policies, not the worth of the people who hold them. Do not use the site to campaign, recruit or preach.

11. Keep quotations short and respect copyright

Quote only as much as you need to make your point, usually a few sentences, and name the source. Do not paste whole chapters, articles or translations. Post only texts and images you have the right to share.

12. Report, don't retaliate

If someone breaks these rules, do not reply in kind. Use Report. It is faster, and it keeps the thread clean.

How to report a problem

There is a Report link under every topic, reply and Journal essay. You can also report a private message sent to you.

1. Choose Report.
2. Pick a reason: spam or advertising; attacks a person rather than an idea; pretends to be someone else; copies someone else's work; or something else.
3. Add a short note for the editors if it helps, and send.

Reports go only to the editors. The member you report is not told who reported them. If several members report the same post, it is hidden automatically until an editor looks at it. Nothing is deleted automatically.

You can also block a member from writing to you. Open your conversation with them in Your page → Inbox and choose Block. Neither of you can then write to the other, and they are not told.

What editors do

Editors are appointed by the site's administrators. They:

• read topics from Readers before they appear
• read every Journal essay before it is published
• handle reports in the review queue
• correct titles and labels, so posts sit in the right place on the map
• hide posts that break these rules

Editors do not read private messages. They see a message only when the person who received it reports it. They then see that message and the few before it, for context.

Every moderation action is written in a log, with who did it and when.

What happens when a rule is broken

We try to respond in proportion. Usually it goes like this:

1. A fix or a friendly note. For a small slip, an editor may correct a label or write to you.
2. The post is taken down. A post that breaks the rules is removed from the site. It goes to the bin first, so it can be restored if we got it wrong.
3. A formal warning. For serious or repeated problems, an editor records a warning and aims to tell you why. A warning returns a Fellow to Reader, so their topics are reviewed again. A member with a warning is not promoted to Fellow automatically.
4. Suspension. For threats, harassment, hate or persistent abuse, an account can be suspended. A suspended member cannot sign in.

Serious cases, such as threats or spam accounts, may go straight to suspension.

How to appeal

If you think an editor got it wrong, tell us. Write through the Contact page, or to info@coordinatesofthought.com. Please include:

• a link to the post, or a short description of the decision
• what you think the mistake was, and why

Please keep the tone of the house. Where we can, an editor who was not involved in the first decision will look at it. We aim to reply within a few days. We would rather correct a mistake than defend one.

When these rules change

We may improve these rules as the community grows. We aim to announce important changes on the site. If you are unsure whether something is allowed, ask the editors before you post.