So let's have the uncomfortable discussion. My view:
This part of this forum was created around 2014. It never was really busy (but that's the case for the forum as a whole), but it was polite. It's what prompted me to stop lurking and join. A place to go to escape FPN's weird moderation, and a place that appeared to be free of the typical FaceBook/Twitter "gotcha" political rhetoric. It had interesting topics too.
Even the "contentious" topics were cordial. See Scotland's Independence. See Musings of Late. See The Great Obscenities.
We even had a 2nd Amendment debate and a Definition of Christian discussion with some contentiousness but little rudeness.
Over time, you begin to develop a feel for some posters. EoC has a tendency to steer topics in certain directions, sometimes interesting and novel but usually just pedantic. If it's a thread on religion, inevitably he will try to make it a proof of God's existence debate. TSherbs has been around from the start, and tends to diplomatically offering his opinion and announcing his departure if it is contested. Ethernautrix has also been around from the beginning as well, and makes me think about things I hadn't considered or asks insightful questions (I've changed my view of the surveillance state recently, prompted by some of her posts and further investigation and reflection).
That changed with Trump. See How far can it go or Great Political Commercials. Vitriol was introduced to the forum, but not too bad. It got worse with the Choices thread, but still not too bad.
Things died down to the typical questions SIR would ask. Some baffled me, to be honest; but they were definitely novel.
When COVID arose, I made the mistake of posing the question of economic risk in response to COVID. Man, did that ever turn out to be a shit-show. I apparently wanted people to die for even considering it, and away we went...
I wondered aloud why otherwise intelligent people weren't able to have a rational discussion over contentious topics. Turned out, many can, as evidenced in Post your contentious virus posts here. The usual suspects attempted to derail it (ultimately successfully). An aside for TSherbs - note post #4 in that thread. Also note your posts in the "definition of Christian" thread.
At that point, the roller coaster had crested the hill. Corniche's I can't fathom this election thread is where it went off the rails. The rhetoric and vitriol began with the second post, and it hasn't let up since.
The thoughtful posters (e.g.: MHosea, Dreck, RayVigo, VertOlive, etc...) have long gone. I don't blame them. I've considered vacating this section as well, but I'm usually not inclined to give up without a fight. The environment has changed from the "Definition of Christian" days.
ethernautrix recently said:
I don't want to fight, but won't run away from one. I've said many times if you won't be an asshole, I won't either. I'll manage to adapt and entertain myself with however any want these threads to play out, as it suits me in a particular instance. I find the variety of human behavior fascinating, and sometimes some of you are just lab rats I poke to see how you'll react. In some cases it becomes so predictable it loses my interest."If you want to "fight," then there is no problem. That's what you're getting. If you don't want to fight, don't fight.
Has anyone noticed that demanding that others change their tone and manners has, like, zero effect, anyway?
I also don't demand others change their tone. I do wish this section were more "Definition of Christian" and less "Choices", but post how you like. Every one of us determines the tenor of this section, and I continue to offer each of you the option. I have a long memory, but don't hold grudges. You can't hurt my feelings, and couldn't care less about group pressure (which should be obvious by now).
An aside, for Lloyd, is that I don't have a "short fuse". I don't get angry at any of this really. At this point I just don't bother taking the long road to the inevitable.
Bookmarks