- Last Active
- Member, Administrator, Moderator, Supporter
I’ll admit I’m not entirely a fan of serious threads getting derailed by some jokey jokes but I’d also point out that we have an extensive thread on COVID and another extensive thread on the Protests and neither have been derailed by the yucks which suggests the community is capable of serious discussions when circumstances warrant it. I personally did not find this particular post was an attempt at a genuine argument, therefore I did not feel the need to on-ramp the discussion back towards more serious topics. I think if we’d like to have a more serious discussion about the forum culture towards dissenting opinions we should make a real thread about and not discuss it in what amounts to flame tweet.
I’ll admit I started out with a joke but I did in fact immediately follow this up by informing the poster that Aron and Jim were very likely to hash it out with them about their decisions on why politics had been moved off the forums, as did @Murderbear, which seems like all response needed, if they were genuinely looking to get a reasoned discussion about why politics were not on the forums anymore they could have started from that viewpoint instead of screaming “fuck you guys I’m taking my ball and going home” in a very public fashion. I know that you have are a guy who engages in reasonable discussion @JoshTheBlack and I respect that but also you didn’t come in hot and heavy from the jump with little to no explanation about what you’re even angry about.@Redrum0376 didn’t even start with what he found so disagreeable in the first place which seems like a bad faith way to start an argument, and notably he has had an account here for a while and his only post on here is a vaguely worded complaint about quitting Bald Move for undefined reasons. If @Redrum0376 would like to engage in an actual argument I will be perfectly willing to take him up on it. I believe you have the best interest in heart but also you can’t claim to know what someone is thinking based on zero evidence if they themselves are unwilling to engage. I am not obliged to assume that someone is arguing in good faith with no prior evidence to that fact or examples of their character.