- Joined
- Nov 27, 2020
- Messages
- 529
- Likes
- 437
A Surfer said:
To be fair, up to now I didn't see it getting overly political even when climate was being discussed. Might have been some room to be tolerant and only step in when and if the discussion truly became too political. This was never an audio thread unless I missed something.
To @A Surfer, I suspect the distinction is one of perspective. I also agree the discussions were not "overly political". But, the discussion kept becoming "somewhat political", moving towards "a bit political" and even "mostly politically" — all the while touching against the line of "overly political" without becoming "obnoxiously political". And in my opinion, some even included what felt like innocuous dog whistles, just begging for "quite overtly political" responses.
To be fair, up to now I didn't see it getting overly political even when climate was being discussed. Might have been some room to be tolerant and only step in when and if the discussion truly became too political. This was never an audio thread unless I missed something.
I would like to add my "thank you" to the moderators on this one (speaking as one who loves a good debate). Aggressive nipping in the bud isn't a bad thing, especially when there is X and Meta and Bluesky and Truth Social and so many other forums for diving into the non-audio related aspects of the wildfires.Like the post of yours I deleted ? Come on ....
To @A Surfer, I suspect the distinction is one of perspective. I also agree the discussions were not "overly political". But, the discussion kept becoming "somewhat political", moving towards "a bit political" and even "mostly politically" — all the while touching against the line of "overly political" without becoming "obnoxiously political". And in my opinion, some even included what felt like innocuous dog whistles, just begging for "quite overtly political" responses.