chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,489
|
Post by chiver78 on Aug 17, 2017 20:56:27 GMT -5
why does it feel like Virgil just derailed this thread b/c he didn't want to discuss the topic?
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,680
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Aug 17, 2017 21:01:49 GMT -5
Maybe because he's upset derail #1 cabs is no longer being discussed? Or perhaps Trump going rogue is expected? Trump staff being stunned, same shit different day?
IDK. Apparently its real hard for most non moderates to left leaners to discuss Trump at all unless it is for giving glowing reviews.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,018
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Aug 17, 2017 21:05:45 GMT -5
I'm loving it! Many of these threads are merely a report of what trump said, or people's reactions to what he said. That would mean merely reporting what comes out of trumps mouth is anti-trump! We can't help it if he's a jackass.....or if other people think he's one
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Aug 17, 2017 21:15:09 GMT -5
"Plenty" doesn't begin to describe the volume of anti-Trump threads in the past month. Even during the epoch of Paul spamming the boards with anti-Obama threads, he was limited to 2 per 36 hours. Approximately 190 anti-Trump threads have been created during the past 30 days, making the average ~9.5 anti-Trump threads per 36 hours--more than four times as bad as the anti-Obama epoch. There are so many, I don't even bother reading the OPs anymore, let alone the threads. I just scan the subject lines and pick one or two per week. I'm guessing that's all anyone does. I don't even want to imagine what will happen if Dezi comes back. I think your 190 threads is an inaccurate count. I think you'd have to count both P&M and Current Events plus assume they are all anti-Trump threads. Also, many posters have been deleted over the years. Its not possible to get an accurate count anymore of when the most anti-Obama threads were generated. It wasn't just Paul even if he was easily the most prolific. Virgil did clarify the epoch of Paul spamming the boards time frame. I also think you are talking back to even before this board started and when we were on the MSN board, since President Obama won in 2008. By this point most of the right wing members had been banished by moderators, so it was basically one person with a smattering of me, Shooby and maybe one other member adding threads that pointed out some, but not all of President Obama's failings. Now tell us how many posters here post ant-Trump threads every day? There is no comparison to the number of threads in past years.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,134
|
Post by tallguy on Aug 17, 2017 21:20:07 GMT -5
There is also no comparison to the number of stupid or vile things serving as reasons for these threads.... Trump does more stupid things before breakfast than Obama would do in a month.
|
|
ken a.k.a OMK
Senior Associate
They killed Kenny, the bastards.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:39:20 GMT -5
Posts: 14,102
Location: Maryland
|
Post by ken a.k.a OMK on Aug 17, 2017 21:24:09 GMT -5
I'm loving it! Many of these threads are merely a report of what trump said, or people's reactions to what he said. That would mean merely reporting what comes out of trumps mouth is anti-trump! We can't help it if he's a jackass.....or if other people think he's one Even when Trump is presented with what he said he says it is fake news. I guess he's telling us not to believe anything he says. Not hard since he's a pathological liar.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,018
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Aug 17, 2017 21:35:23 GMT -5
I'm loving it! Many of these threads are merely a report of what trump said, or people's reactions to what he said. That would mean merely reporting what comes out of trumps mouth is anti-trump! We can't help it if he's a jackass.....or if other people think he's one Even when Trump is presented with what he said he says it is fake news. I guess he's telling us not to believe anything he says. Not hard since he's a pathological liar. bingo! like the winery comment!
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,680
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Aug 17, 2017 21:41:11 GMT -5
I think your 190 threads is an inaccurate count. I think you'd have to count both P&M and Current Events plus assume they are all anti-Trump threads. Also, many posters have been deleted over the years. Its not possible to get an accurate count anymore of when the most anti-Obama threads were generated. It wasn't just Paul even if he was easily the most prolific. Virgil did clarify the epoch of Paul spamming the boards time frame. I also think you are talking back to even before this board started and when we were on the MSN board, since President Obama won in 2008. By this point most of the right wing members had been banished by moderators, so it was basically one person with a smattering of me, Shooby and maybe one other member adding threads that pointed out some, but not all of President Obama's failings. Now tell us how many posters here post ant-Trump threads every day? There is no comparison to the number of threads in past years. I read the MSN P&M board very infrequently. I really started reading here more and quite a few people came over. I no longer remember their names but they didn't last as long as say Krickett and Marshabar to name just a couple. All those posts are gone along with their creators. So you can't look back to the early threads remaining and actually get an accurate view of what was. A good portion of what was, is gone. Threads, replies, and posters.
And no, I'm not talking about 2008 on MSN. I'm talking about here.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 20, 2024 3:32:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2017 21:43:57 GMT -5
I know Virgil can answer for himself, but I must say it is relevant. He mentioned Paul to stave off all the "yes, but Paul flooded the boards with anti-Obama rhetoric/lies", etc, so he just saved the members of this board hours of unrelenting piling on by mentioning him. Consider it a favor to our members. And that is the other difference. Of all the anti-Trump threads here, how many are untrue? All are sourced, and most by major news sources with some even being by conservative writers and outlets. The anti-Obama threads noted previously were generally from "extreme" or discredited sources, or were the poster's opinion, replete with fabrications or mis-characterizations of the other side. If people are weary of the number of anti-Trump threads being created, pray that Trump stops doing stupid or vile things. The number of threads would necessarily slow. But, if I may offer a word of advice, don't hold your breath. Quite a few of them either have been from the start, or eventually include untruth about him... which is sad, really, because of all the bad things about him that could be discussed that actually are true.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Aug 18, 2017 1:28:49 GMT -5
I think your 190 threads is an inaccurate count. I think you'd have to count both P&M and Current Events plus assume they are all anti-Trump threads. Also, many posters have been deleted over the years. Its not possible to get an accurate count anymore of when the most anti-Obama threads were generated. It wasn't just Paul even if he was easily the most prolific. I did count both boards, and I'll go on record claiming the count is accurate to within 20%. I've been toying with the idea of creating a "No Trump" thread where anything related to the man is off-limits. It would be a catch-all to discuss issues behind current events, e.g. the attack in Charlottesville, the attack in Barcelona, the trade war with China, North Korea, etc., without the inevitable devolution into bickering over Pres. Trump. Any post containing a reference to Pres. Trump or his office, directly, indirectly, or even through inference, would be summarily deleted. We might actually get back to some meaningful issue-based discussions. I've almost forgotten what those were like. I'd have to run the proposal by admin first. Funny how you didn't do that about Obama. Everything was allowed, from references to his colour to photo-shopped memes. Now that it's Trump, it's "Oh no, you can't do that!"
|
|
Cheesy FL-Vol
Junior Associate
"Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing." -- Helen Keller
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:13:50 GMT -5
Posts: 6,686
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":""}
|
Post by Cheesy FL-Vol on Aug 18, 2017 4:37:00 GMT -5
I think your 190 threads is an inaccurate count. I think you'd have to count both P&M and Current Events plus assume they are all anti-Trump threads. Also, many posters have been deleted over the years. Its not possible to get an accurate count anymore of when the most anti-Obama threads were generated. It wasn't just Paul even if he was easily the most prolific. I did count both boards, and I'll go on record claiming the count is accurate to within 20%. I've been toying with the idea of creating a "No Trump" thread where anything related to the man is off-limits. It would be a catch-all to discuss issues behind current events, e.g. the attack in Charlottesville, the attack in Barcelona, the trade war with China, North Korea, etc., without the inevitable devolution into bickering over Pres. Trump. Any post containing a reference to Pres. Trump or his office, directly, indirectly, or even through inference, would be summarily deleted. We might actually get back to some meaningful issue-based discussions. I've almost forgotten what those were like. I'd have to run the proposal by admin first. I hope not. One of the reasons I have been back has been to give me political perspective from both sides of the spectrum. I can't discuss politics at home because DH is so pissed that Trump won. Any discussion raises his blood pressure. I don't know how it is for anyone else here, but I need a place to try to understand the viewpoints of others. In many cases articles posted are from sources I didn't know existed and they broaden my knowledge of politics, policy, and finance. Like it or not, the things DT says and does impacts everyone in America in some way or another. He also has a significant impact worldwide. I think it is almost impossible now to separate Trump from current events.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,040
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 18, 2017 9:42:38 GMT -5
I did count both boards, and I'll go on record claiming the count is accurate to within 20%.
I've been toying with the idea of creating a "No Trump" thread where anything related to the man is off-limits. It would be a catch-all to discuss issues behind current events, e.g. the attack in Charlottesville, the attack in Barcelona, the trade war with China, North Korea, etc., without the inevitable devolution into bickering over Pres. Trump. Any post containing a reference to Pres. Trump or his office, directly, indirectly, or even through inference, would be summarily deleted. We might actually get back to some meaningful issue-based discussions. I've almost forgotten what those were like. I'd have to run the proposal by admin first. I think you are high Virgil doesn't do drugs. but if you meant he is exaggerating..... HE.... ALWAYS....EXAGGERATES. if this weren't a discussion board, where such low hanging fruit must be continually plucked to ensure that the remaining fruit ripens without rotting, it might be considered a quaint and endearing trait.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,680
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Aug 18, 2017 9:53:24 GMT -5
Virgil doesn't do drugs. but if you meant he is exaggerating..... HE.... ALWAYS....EXAGGERATES. if this weren't a discussion board, where such low hanging fruit must be continually plucked to ensure that the remaining fruit ripens without rotting, it might be considered a quaint and endearing trait. Now I know to check. When I couldn't even get to an estimated count of 190 threads on the 4 pages of P&M in a month's time period, I suspected exaggeration.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 20, 2024 3:32:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2017 11:59:31 GMT -5
If we're confessing here, I also have a big problem with 'than' and 'then.'
Have to think about that one every time.
And one time, when writing a request for funds to corporate to install storm water dikes, only spelled them 'd-y-k-e-s.' Like 10 times in that one document, so I couldn't even pretend it was a one-of error.
Whet all the way up the food chain and not a single executive noticed my mistake (or they didn't read the document.)
Or maybe they thought I was going to kill a bunch of gay women and construct a storm water barrier with their corpses - and were ok with that? Monsters.
(I also have trouble with 'rip rap' versus 'riff raff.')
But it sure does bother me to see 'reigned in.'
Well you really shouldn't be whetting anyone up the food chain . That might be bad for your career. That said, everone please don't stop making spelling mistakes since that would make mine all the more glaring. TYIA. I'm going to sic Weltz on you. She'll give you the "what for" on your lack of spelling acumen. Edit; I've been there.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 20, 2024 3:32:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2017 12:05:58 GMT -5
It's hard to keep up when your on the paying end of taxes and go to work every day. i posted two threads. they got precisely ZERO responses from anyone right of center. that took precisely ZERO hours, ZERO minutes, and ZERO seconds of any of y'alls precious time. so forgive me if i call bullshit on this. it takes NOTHING to "keep up", whether you are working or NOT. Hi DJ ! Actually, the last 4 weeks have been kind of hectic for a retiree. My aging MIL has been a handful and my older buddy broke his ankle. His wife is disabled so I've been helping out. I should be back on track in a couple more weeks, to take up the defense of conservatives once again.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Aug 18, 2017 12:58:15 GMT -5
Well you really shouldn't be whetting anyone up the food chain . That might be bad for your career. That said, everone please don't stop making spelling mistakes since that would make mine all the more glaring. TYIA. I'm going to sic Weltz on you. She'll give you the "what for" on your lack of spelling acumen. Edit; I've been there. Well, my mother tongue isn't English. However, it was a b!tch to learn. It's one of THE hardest languages to grasp, with no rhyme or reason. If I can try to avoid glaring grammatical errors, then surely a native speaker can, as well.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 18, 2017 13:06:25 GMT -5
I'm sure you count differently, but I came up with 13 on Current Events. I counted ~30 on CE. Plus 5 that would qualify on YMOT and 150 on Politics--roughly three quarters of all threads created there in the past 30 days. I'm not going to list them. Do I need a "safe space"? What I need is a "sick space". I'm sick of hearing about the man, for better or for worse. The discussions are mindless, superficial and thoroughly uninteresting. If I wanted that, I'd be fishing in other ponds.
|
|
steff
Senior Associate
I'll sleep when I'm dead
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 17:34:24 GMT -5
Posts: 10,772
|
Post by steff on Aug 18, 2017 13:15:52 GMT -5
There's a really easy solution for stuff you don't want to read about. There's this little X at the top right of the screen. You click on it and BOOM! you don't have to read about stuff you don't like anymore.
So easy even trump supporter can do it!
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 18, 2017 13:23:17 GMT -5
Phenomenal advice.
Any on what to do when your favourite political board is cluttered with so much crap that it's completely displaced or infected the issue-centered debates you've been enjoying for 8 years?
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Aug 18, 2017 13:23:47 GMT -5
I'm sure you count differently, but I came up with 13 on Current Events. I counted ~30 on CE. Plus 5 that would qualify on YMOT and 150 on Politics--roughly three quarters of all threads created there in the past 30 days. I'm not going to list them. Do I need a "safe space"? What I need is a "sick space". I'm sick of hearing about the man, for better or for worse. The discussions are mindless, superficial and thoroughly uninteresting. If I wanted that, I'd be fishing in other ponds. Turn off the computer and GO OUTSIDE! You'll feel much better.
|
|
steff
Senior Associate
I'll sleep when I'm dead
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 17:34:24 GMT -5
Posts: 10,772
|
Post by steff on Aug 18, 2017 13:29:19 GMT -5
Personally, I post of several boards, not just this one here. When this one turns into something I can no longer deal with, I take a break & post elsewhere. Again, a REALLY simple solution. We know you think you are more important than most people, but you don't get to decide the tone of threads created. You may have limited the daily number, but you can't change the fact that there is a LOT to discuss on MANY different levels & subjects that surround this so called 'president'.
If you don't like it, find a place that is more in line with your views and enjoy it. Stop trying to decide what the rest of us can or can't do here.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,433
|
Post by billisonboard on Aug 18, 2017 13:35:10 GMT -5
There's a really easy solution for stuff you don't want to read about. There's this little X at the top right of the screen. You click on it and BOOM! you don't have to read about stuff you don't like anymore. So easy even trump supporter can do it! Virgil Showlion , another idea is I can send you my eclipse glasses once I am done with them next week. They would allow you to look at the screen and not see a thing. Let me know.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 18, 2017 13:48:57 GMT -5
There's a really easy solution for stuff you don't want to read about. There's this little X at the top right of the screen. You click on it and BOOM! you don't have to read about stuff you don't like anymore. So easy even trump supporter can do it! Virgil Showlion , another idea is I can send you my eclipse glasses once I am done with them next week. They would allow you to look at the screen and not see a thing. Let me know. I might take you up on that offer, Billis. The problem is that I'd like to be able to read the discussions and participate. I've been holding out hope for a year that the board might revert to some degree of pre-Trump normalcy but the man has become the Sun in the solar system of the post-2016 American psyche. Everything continues to orbit in tight proximity to him, never achieving escape velocity, and I'm meanwhile adrift in the outer reaches. I know what my options are, and I know that pining for the way things were won't make it so.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Aug 18, 2017 14:16:23 GMT -5
Virgil Showlion , another idea is I can send you my eclipse glasses once I am done with them next week. They would allow you to look at the screen and not see a thing. Let me know. I might take you up on that offer, Billis. The problem is that I'd like to be able to read the discussions and participate. I've been holding out hope for a year that the board might revert to some degree of pre-Trump normalcy but the man has become the Sun in the solar system of the post-2016 American psyche. Everything continues to orbit in tight proximity to him, never achieving escape velocity, and I'm meanwhile adrift in the outer reaches. I know what my options are, and I know that pining for the way things were won't make it so. Oh, you mean all the Obama-bashing?
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Aug 18, 2017 14:41:16 GMT -5
Phenomenal advice. Any on what to do when your favourite political board is cluttered with so much crap that it's completely displaced or infected the issue-centered debates you've been enjoying for 8 years? Start a thread on another topic? Just out of curiosity, are you counting the "Another Day, Another Anti-Trump Thread" thread as one of the Trump-related threads? Because in that one, the conservative poster was so sick of the anti-Trump threads he had to start an entire thread devoted to how people should talk about other topics (instead of, you know, actually talking about these other topics by starting a thread on one of them). It makes it seem like conservatives can't think of anything else to discuss either.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 18, 2017 15:08:13 GMT -5
Phenomenal advice. Any on what to do when your favourite political board is cluttered with so much crap that it's completely displaced or infected the issue-centered debates you've been enjoying for 8 years? Start a thread on another topic? Just out of curiosity, are you counting the "Another Day, Another Anti-Trump Thread" thread as one of the Trump-related threads? Because in that one, the conservative poster was so sick of the anti-Trump threads he had to start an entire thread devoted to how people should talk about other topics (instead of, you know, actually talking about these other topics by starting a thread on one of them). It makes it seem like conservatives can't think of anything else to discuss either. The secret sauce, I believe, is what I proposed earlier: a single no-Trump "safe zone" thread, with the exclusion enforced. The inclusion would cover any mention of Pres. Trump in any context, including complaints about too much Trump. The conversation we're having now, for instance, couldn't take place on the new thread. Perhaps it would die. I certainly couldn't sustain it on my own. But I believe it would be a worthwhile experiment. I was thinking about making it user-policed under the following protocol: - members could flag posts as "Trump-related" subject to their best judgment, given a summary set of rules
- any post flagged by 3+ members would be instantly hidden and ultimately deleted
- mods would review flagged posts; members found to be erroneously flagging posts would lose their ability to do so
- members accumulating more than three hidden posts per 90 days would be locked out of the thread
The exclusion would be strict. Not only direct references, but anything that could be reasonably inferred as referring to Pres. Trump or his administration would be off-limits. To avoid the appearance of partisanship, I'd be more than happy to include Ms. Clinton and Pres. Obama on the list of exclusions for the thread. This would prevent "But Hillary..." tu quoque defenses that frustrate local Democrats. Frankly, the thread would be a real oasis in the middle of an ideological wasteland.
I'd expect a rocky start, with various members testing out how far they could push things, but ultimately any malcontents would make their peace with the thread and we'd have our oasis.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Aug 18, 2017 15:26:20 GMT -5
That sounds like a lot of trouble from both the poster and the mod end. Why not just start a thread about a non-Trump topic and ignore any Trump-related deflections that pop up? If the other conservatives are as sick of Trump-bashing threads as you claim, surely you'd get some discussion on a more neutral topic.
If that doesn't work and people continue to discuss Trump in a thread that has nothing to do with him, well, there's your answer as to what people want to discuss, I guess... not much you can do about that.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,856
|
Post by happyhoix on Aug 18, 2017 15:33:59 GMT -5
Start a thread on another topic? Just out of curiosity, are you counting the "Another Day, Another Anti-Trump Thread" thread as one of the Trump-related threads? Because in that one, the conservative poster was so sick of the anti-Trump threads he had to start an entire thread devoted to how people should talk about other topics (instead of, you know, actually talking about these other topics by starting a thread on one of them). It makes it seem like conservatives can't think of anything else to discuss either. The secret sauce, I believe, is what I proposed earlier: a single no-Trump "safe zone" thread, with the exclusion enforced. The inclusion would cover any mention of Pres. Trump in any context, including complaints about too much Trump. The conversation we're having now, for instance, couldn't take place on the new thread. Perhaps it would die. I certainly couldn't sustain it on my own. But I believe it would be a worthwhile experiment. I was thinking about making it user-policed under the following protocol: - members could flag posts as "Trump-related" subject to their best judgment, given a summary set of rules
- any post flagged by 3+ members would be instantly hidden and ultimately deleted
- mods would review flagged posts; members found to be erroneously flagging posts would lose their ability to do so
- members accumulating more than three hidden posts per 90 days would be locked out of the thread
The exclusion would be strict. Not only direct references, but anything that could be reasonably inferred as referring to Pres. Trump or his administration would be off-limits. To avoid the appearance of partisanship, I'd be more than happy to include Ms. Clinton and Pres. Obama on the list of exclusions for the thread. This would prevent "But Hillary..." tu quoque defenses that frustrate local Democrats. Frankly, the thread would be a real oasis in the middle of an ideological wasteland.
I'd expect a rocky start, with various members testing out how far they could push things, but ultimately any malcontents would make their peace with the thread and we'd have our oasis. That's in interesting thought, but wouldn't we have difficulty finding political topics that are not at all related to Trump? Talk about Devos in education, it will ultimately go back to who put her there. Talk about the US withdrawing from the Paris treaty - goes back to who withdrew us.
Talk about why tax reform will be so very hard to get done, that goes back to Trump stuck in a quagmire unable to move his agenda forward due to the carnival show all around him.
Even if we talk about foreign politics, we're in danger of getting sucked back into the Trump black hole. (North Korea, Syria, Russia).
Literally, the man IS a black hole, drawing all the attention in the country into himself. I don't like it any better than you do, but I don't know if we can figure out a way to safely have discussions that don't end up circling back to that giant sucking black hole.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Aug 18, 2017 16:31:39 GMT -5
How about just accepting that Trump is a whirling dervish of poo that has to create a new news item every 2-3 hours every day to feed his narcissism and that his actions may cause numerous threads to be started by us Americans that are stuck with this jerkwater as our POTUS until such time as we escape. Canadians are such nice people filled with empathy. Please, Virgil, have some for us.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 18, 2017 20:33:11 GMT -5
The secret sauce, I believe, is what I proposed earlier: a single no-Trump "safe zone" thread, with the exclusion enforced. The inclusion would cover any mention of Pres. Trump in any context, including complaints about too much Trump. The conversation we're having now, for instance, couldn't take place on the new thread. Perhaps it would die. I certainly couldn't sustain it on my own. But I believe it would be a worthwhile experiment. I was thinking about making it user-policed under the following protocol: - members could flag posts as "Trump-related" subject to their best judgment, given a summary set of rules
- any post flagged by 3+ members would be instantly hidden and ultimately deleted
- mods would review flagged posts; members found to be erroneously flagging posts would lose their ability to do so
- members accumulating more than three hidden posts per 90 days would be locked out of the thread
The exclusion would be strict. Not only direct references, but anything that could be reasonably inferred as referring to Pres. Trump or his administration would be off-limits. To avoid the appearance of partisanship, I'd be more than happy to include Ms. Clinton and Pres. Obama on the list of exclusions for the thread. This would prevent "But Hillary..." tu quoque defenses that frustrate local Democrats. Frankly, the thread would be a real oasis in the middle of an ideological wasteland.
I'd expect a rocky start, with various members testing out how far they could push things, but ultimately any malcontents would make their peace with the thread and we'd have our oasis. That's in interesting thought, but wouldn't we have difficulty finding political topics that are not at all related to Trump? Talk about Devos in education, it will ultimately go back to who put her there. Talk about the US withdrawing from the Paris treaty - goes back to who withdrew us.
Talk about why tax reform will be so very hard to get done, that goes back to Trump stuck in a quagmire unable to move his agenda forward due to the carnival show all around him.
Even if we talk about foreign politics, we're in danger of getting sucked back into the Trump black hole. (North Korea, Syria, Russia).
Literally, the man IS a black hole, drawing all the attention in the country into himself. I don't like it any better than you do, but I don't know if we can figure out a way to safely have discussions that don't end up circling back to that giant sucking black hole.
I understand well why most discussions gravitate towards him. But I've also observed that posters are compelled to criticize him or defend him, and that this need consistently outweighs the need to sustain existing debates. Poster A and B will be discussing the pros and cons of staying in the Paris treaty, poster C will come in and (not unfairly) mention Pres. Trump, either A or B will respond defensively, their counterpart will follow suit, and the original discussion is permanently lost. In other cases, poster C will come in and (not unfairly) mention Pres. Obama, either A or B responds with a tu quoque naming Pres. Trump, and the end is the same. You might say that "Trump" is an apt surname, given the man trumps all other topics of conversation. A safe thread would be unique in that it would suppress the compulsion to attack or defend the man (and likewise for Pres. Obama and Ms. Clinton). Hence a discussion about the Paris treaty remains focused on the nature of the treaty, climate change, etc. Neither side is beholden to attack or defend the (ex-) US leadership. It's a place where posters can express their opinions without fretting over the inevitability of having to discuss controversial people rather than controversial issues. This would be particularly precious to a poster like me who agrees with some of Pres. Trump's policies/positions but generally can't stand the man. We won't have to waste time perpetually disclaiming that our agreement with Pres. Trump on issue X doesn't equate to support for the man. The issue doesn't get dragged off the rails by the "You're either pro-Trump or anti-Trump" dialectic. The more I talk about it, the more I'm convinced it's a worthwhile experiment. I'm going to run it by admin to see about giving it a try. I'll bet it'll be a hit once it gets up and running.
|
|