| General > General Technical Chat |
| Dilbert loses newspapers, publishers, distributor, and possibly its website |
| << < (155/222) > >> |
| fourfathom:
--- Quote from: tooki on March 14, 2023, 06:39:22 pm ---The solution we came upon was to create a “political lounge” where special (looser) rules were in effect. It was spectacularly effective at being a lightning rod for the political discussion. --- End quote --- This is what was done on the "Sailing Anarchy" forum where I occasionally hang out. "Political Anarchy" is generally considered to be a toxic waste dump, but there are actually serious and interesting discussions going on there, and the sub-forum keeps most of the crap out of the sailing-related forums. If someone gets too political and nasty we just tell them "Take it to PA" (Political Anarchy) and that usually works. But I'm happy with the arrangement here. Just don't follow the discussion if it holds no interest for you. And Cancel Culture is a thing. It seems to be an extension of the unhinged over-reactions that are so common now. I'm not likely to find myself "cancelled", but I do avoid voicing my opinion where doing so would be like stirring up a hornet's nest. We used to be able to have a civil discussion among friends, but that has become increasingly difficult. The hornets anger so easily now... |
| tooki:
--- Quote from: james_s on March 14, 2023, 06:53:43 pm --- --- Quote from: Tomorokoshi on March 14, 2023, 12:07:03 pm ---It would actually seem to be a framework, modified in any form you wish to avoid the subject that shall not be talked about, except that it also is an invitation to define "cancel culture", "woke", etc. The point being that while you have repeatedly tried to narrow the discussion to the only Dilbert and Scott Adams, you yourself keep using politically-charged and subject-that-shall-not-be-named-charged terms like "cancel culture" and "woke". Therefore you are breaking your own rules; put in engineering terms, you have a case of bus contention. Mismatched impedances. while(1). --- End quote --- Well the alternative would be to lock the whole thread, which I suppose may be your goal? Personally I don't see why people that are not interested in the thread don't just exit and ignore it? Nothing exists in a vacuum and to some degree it is impossible to completely and totally separate politics from everything else. Corporate politics are a real thing we all have to deal with, politics are everywhere. Dave can do whatever he wants, it has been stated in the past this is his sandbox and it isn't a democracy. --- End quote --- Either enforce the rule as written (which would be to stop it), or leave it open and allow both sides to express their opinions. What isn't acceptable is the status quo, which is to harshly castigate those few of us who disagree with his opinion but turn a blind eye to (or at minimum, be more lenient with) those who agree with his opinion. |
| james_s:
Both sides have expressed their opinions, what more is there to express? Some people acknowledge that "cancel culture" is a real thing and a problematic trend where people are bullied into silence, even if all they are doing is questioning a prevailing narrative or wanting to discuss other ideas, not necessarily even attacking anyone. The other side seems to be people that either flatly deny this is even happening at all, or they try to justify the bullying. All of these things have been brought up and discussed, and as long as it hasn't gone off onto other political tangents such as socialism, communism, specific politicians, covid, etc it has been tolerated. I don't think it's that hard to discuss a concept like cancel culture as it applies to the Scott Adams saga and other aspects of engineering without drifting off into general politics. There have been a few eye openers here, such as the guy that claimed questioning something is the same as advocating for it, a truly bizarre (in my mind) logical conclusion that could explain some of the reactions that occur in the world these days. The way I look at it, allowing threads like this to exist at all involves bending the rules, and I appreciate that it has been allowed in moderation because the topic is interesting and relevant, but it has to remain civil, and it's nice that it's contained in one or two threads which are easily avoided for those not interested. It would totally ruin the forum if it spread everywhere and took over. |
| ebastler:
--- Quote from: james_s on March 14, 2023, 08:51:55 pm ---There have been a few eye openers here, such as the guy that claimed questioning something is the same as advocating for it, a truly bizarre (in my mind) logical conclusion that could explain some of the reactions that occur in the world these days. --- End quote --- Are you doing this for manipulative purpose or due to a cognitive limitation? --- Quote from: Kim Christensen on March 11, 2023, 02:12:24 am ---Questioning whether a law that bans X should exist, is the same as advocating for X. --- End quote --- |
| james_s:
--- Quote from: ebastler on March 14, 2023, 09:14:41 pm --- --- Quote from: james_s on March 14, 2023, 08:51:55 pm ---There have been a few eye openers here, such as the guy that claimed questioning something is the same as advocating for it, a truly bizarre (in my mind) logical conclusion that could explain some of the reactions that occur in the world these days. --- End quote --- Are you doing this for manipulative purpose or due to a cognitive limitation? --- Quote from: Kim Christensen on March 11, 2023, 02:12:24 am ---Questioning whether a law that bans X should exist, is the same as advocating for X. --- End quote --- --- End quote --- Doing what? Remembering the specific line incorrectly and leaving out the word "law"? Does that really matter? Cognitive limitation? Why not just skip the euphemism and say what you mean, which is that you think I'm stupid? "Questioning whether a law that bans X should exist, is the same as advocating for X" is a truly bizarre logical conclusion in my mind, correcting the quote doesn't really change what I said at all. I was genuinely surprised to learn that an otherwise apparently rational person thinks this way. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |