In addition to moderation of technical aspects and content, we might employ a form of referee type moderation such as moderation in a debate where two sides must stick to the terms of the moderator who determines what is and is not allowed and will openly either censure or lock threads when lines have been crossed, however this is very hard to do for passionate threads with lots of posting and opinionated people.
I will add that part of the point of my thread I started, the locked one, is that human nature is very hard to overcome in terms of behavior and that this affects us on many levels. We might not as a group or species be able to ever have entirely civil debates on passionate topics, I know for a fact I can't. I have problems staying civil when it comes to politics and religion and other things so I try to avoid getting into it too much.
I know I can be civil often, but I know that I, being human, often have problems with it when the topic is something I really care about. This can be good too, instinctively for example, we are passionate in general about our offspring, and so when we feel that they are under threat we become aggressive, like a mama bear protecting her cubs, but as that we have developed language now our stated beliefs become as children to us and our mammal instinct still cause us to seek to become aggressive and protect them. Our beliefs are our babies!
I know I want to blame the other party when they get aggressive in conversation and that I get aggressive in response often, but I also realize it is not their beliefs or my beliefs per say that are causing this, it is the attachment to those beliefs, our bond to them, that causes us to defend them so animately. I've only come to realize this for myself lately and have been able to make some friends I never could have had before because we differ so very much on belief. I have to remind myself constantly around them though that just because their beliefs bother me, and I want to defend my own different beliefs against their belief's encroachment upon my own, does not mean that my beliefs are literally under attack, nor does their belief make them my enemy.
I have a friend for example who is extremely political, and very inflammatory, and has no filter and is highly offensive to most people. I never could have been friends with her in the past because of my instincts and natural reactions. Sometimes just hearing what she says makes me want to respond unkindly, but I realize also that she is a good person, a helpful person. So while I still discuss politics with her, I stay rather reserved and realize I won't change her opinion, nor her mine, I listen and respond sparingly and know that I am content in my belief. As a mammal I want to go to war with her, but as someone who believes in loving my neighbors as myself, so to speak
I tend to just say if I agree or don't and leave it at that, not getting into the why of my belief.
Being a human is damned difficult. Being humane is even harder.
I know I have problems, that helps me remember where those lines are that I do not want to cross. We can all cross those lines from time to time and need to be forgiving, if we can, of not only others, but of our own instinctive reactions, if you can forgive your own emotional reaction you can avoid letting it compel you to enter into or sustain a conflict.
The problem here again, for me, is that there is no group approach or rule that can just solve the problem of our instinct and nature. I don't think it is possible for rules to be made that ensure conflict will not occur, because you can't change people into not-people with rules. What is more reasonable are guidelines for conduct, conflict resolution, and perhaps an approach similar to the way new members are allowed to post in other areas. For example, I once had a problem with political debates at another website and asked moderators to make it so I could not see the areas of the forum where politics were debated. A special member group for me was made and it worked very well, out of sight out of mind.
The way this would work is that forums allowing heated debates would be hidden from those who had not logged in, and from those who were not in the groups allowing access to them, sort of like a mod forum section, except that once a person has full membership they can participate in them, but if they have problems with conflict then they get a little time out.
You see, the proposal here was to perhaps avoid these topics entirely, but many of these topics are worth discussing and relevant to the site in many ways, so perhaps some people should, voluntarily or not, avoid these topics. I am likely one of them who should, at least at times. However that some people should avoid such topics sometimes does not mean they are incapable of healthy considerate debate about those topics, and people who are generally cool can lose their cool from time to time, as is natural for people upset or under stress.
I don't want to see these topics banned, nor do I want to see conflicts arise among people who would get along if it were not for the topic at hand.
Sorry, this has been an opinion piece and proposes very little. This is a difficult problem that many a moderator at many a site has been frustrated by.