Just Thinking About Our No-Politics Rule

gruntlabor said:
I believe we have professional activists here muddying up the waters...
Click to expand...

I don't think the average poster on most boards realize that some people are paid to post in support of a political candidate, ideology etc. It gets pretty easy to spot them once you know. But I don't fully blame the paid posters for the the deterioration of threads discussing especially American politics. We have a mainstream liberal media and an alternate right media. Most of these have the goal of polarizing the American public on so many ideological and political topics. Supporters of whichever of the two quickly devolve onto calling the other "extreme left", "extreme right" as though there are no more moderates or middle leaning right and left. (There are: I am as well as others here and most of us find the middle spectrum a lonely place.)

As the language moves to calling the other side extreme, there usually follows an attempt to discredit the other to the point of using mental health jargon. Those who like to use label ideological opponents "extreme" or "far" whatever and use mental health disparaging terms tend also to have their list of "trusted media sources" of either flavor and don't often analyze a variety of sources as well as delve deeper into the sources cited in news reports. I use a label for this approach to news sources ....intellectual laziness. But it is understandable in a way because it's what we're herded to do and it's taking the easy path in an increasingly complex world.

As for the rule on this forum: We're guests of Matrix. Refraining from political discussions per his rule is no different than respecting the wishes of a friend who has a no smoking policy in their home.
 

Last edited:
AnnieA said:
I don't think the average poster on most boards realize that some people are paid to post in support of a political candidate, ideology etc. It gets pretty easy to spot them once you know. But I don't fully blame the paid posters for the the deterioration of threads discussing especially American politics. We have a mainstream liberal media and an alternate right media. Most of these have the goal of polarizing the American public on so many ideological and political topics. Supporters of whichever of the two quickly devolve onto calling the other "extreme left", "extreme right" as though there are no more moderates or middle leaning right and left. (There are: I am as well as others here and most of us find the middle spectrum a lonely place.)

As the language moves to calling the other side extreme, there usually follows an attempt to discredit the other to the point of using mental health jargon. Those who like to use label ideological opponents "extreme whatever" and use mental health disparaging terms tend also to have their list of "trusted media sources" of either flavor and don't often analyze a variety of sources as well as delve deeper into the sources cited in news reports. I'll happily use a label for this approach to news sources ....intellectual laziness. But it is understandable in a way because it's what we're herded to do and it's taking the easy path in an increasingly complex world.

As for the rule on this forum: We're guests of Matrix. Refraining from political discussions per his rule is no different than respecting the wishes of a friend who has a no smoking policy in their home.
Click to expand...
As for the rule of this forum: - very nicely put - couldn't be simplier or clearer - damn I've got a burning pipe in me pocket now!
 
We agree that we will not discuss politics, especially anything that would cause fighting between members. But, IMO the Senior Forum is extremely political. It is heavily influenced by "populism". Posts that prioritize the concerns and opinions of the common people over those of a small group.
 
Never discuss politics, religion or money. The more isolated we become, the more difficult it is to relate to others who don't share our point of view, which is probably why most people find debating politics, religion or money, difficult, contentious, and something to avoid.

To see a perfect example of contention in those subjects Google The Reverend Ian Paisley and watch a rant that could melt metal.
 
Pardon the analogy here, but it seems most people are more like branded cattle when it comes to politics. They don't free-graze, but tend to stay in their own pasture.
One would think that truth would change people, but it doesn't. If it doesn't suit our pallet, we usually spit it out. Our beliefs become an extension of who we are, and when they are threatened, I think most people get defensive.
 
I personally am not a fan of politics, or as an old boyfriend used to call it..poli-tricks. I can only take a few minutes of it when a friend always wants to talk politics, especially about a certain person who's always in the news, then I have to change the subject. My late husband was very much into politics but we hardly talked about such matters. I believe what @hollydolly and others have posted (in different threads) about how political discussions got very contentious here and on other forums. I am so glad the no politics rule is in place here. Those who really want to discuss politics can find other forums on which to do it.
 
bobcat said:
Pardon the analogy here, but it seems most people are more like branded cattle when it comes to politics. They don't free-graze, but tend to stay in their own pasture.
One would think that truth would change people, but it doesn't. If it doesn't suit our pallet, we usually spit it out. Our beliefs become an extension of who we are, and when they are threatened, I think most people get defensive.
Click to expand...

Ditto Religion, which I would ban discussion of also.

I have a friend who sailed the seas as senior engineer on tankers and freighters for many years. He told me that "Ships Rules" banned talk of either Religion or Politics, with severe consequences if found to do so. Basically you left the vessel at the next port.
 
Gary O' said:
View attachment 345968
Click to expand...

I love that. I’ve always been able to empathize with both conservative and progressive sentiments. Who doesn’t cherish what is already good or wish to improve what is less good?

Regardless of any over arching principles, moderating forums is not the most fun you can have on a forums. Not everyone has the tech savvy to do it let alone the temperament and judgement. As someone who lacks the know how and disposition I just appreciate anyone willing to take it on, especially one able to maintain the balance this place has. So my ‘vote’ is with Matrix .. and thank you.

On a political note, I do wish we still had a party that emphasized conserving as a check on progressive tendencies. Spreading chaos isn’t an adequate replacement.
 
I only pay attention to town and county politics. I won't discuss politics with anyone except my wife. Openly pick a side in politics and have half as many friends and twice as many arguments.

To add, I like this forum because it's people trying to help people in the same stage of life.
 
gruntlabor said:
Not asking for change, just thinking about the rule.
This site is my first forum. At first I thought the 'No Politics' rule was shockingly misguided because it interfered with free speech, it shouted censorship.
But some things should be censored, of course, as child porn or slander or the old saw of shouting fire in a crowded theater.
I respect whatever Matrix thinks is best, but if I ever had a vote regarding disallowed content on this site, I would vote to expand the 'No Politics' rule. I believe we have professional activists here muddying up the waters and stirring up dust clouds, and telling actual lies --making it impossible to see clearly. Please don't demand proof of that --I'm just stating an opinion, maybe a wrong one. Maybe just open your eyes to the possibility.
I don't think we should ban any subject until we see it devolved into personal insults and name calling which, of course, can ruin a person's day or worse.
However, I would vote for NO POLITICS up to and including any subject that draws activists like flies to a carcass.
What do you think?
I believe Matrix is doing a great job with these difficult choices.
To quote Aunt Mavis: Discuss.
**Did you know that congress wanted to blow up the moon. Why? Because they thought they could.**
Click to expand...

Politics and religion are two topics that as easily sow division as it does anything else. People are entrenched in their beliefs, they get angry, they get upset. Both topics can be incendiary, and as such, it's a good idea to have bans (although religion is allowed here). Honestly, is it really a great loss we can't talk about specific candidates and party's here? Even elections today are fueled by hate, anger, and various types of violence, and it's to the detriment of society.

We should also remember that there is no "free speech" on the internet. We are guests here, we have, in effect, walked into the living room of our host, Matrix. His home, his rules. He doesn't have a lot of rules, but no politics is one because overall, it's a detriment to the health of the forum.

The only time things get cloudy is when social issues are discussed. We live in times when it seems we can't discuss any social issue without taking one political side or another. Hell, anything but actually think about the why's and wherefores. Whatever happened, it seems the blame must always sit with politicians. Yet often, the issues at hand are generational (I was just watching a video about a demand for more housing covering the Victorian era, for example!)

As for a claim for "political activists" that are knowingly telling lies - I've not seen any evidence of that myself. Without wanting to denigrate any individuals, we have a share of people that broadly represents society in general, that have entrenched beliefs largely stemming from propaganda and misinformation. Research is out, believing in Social Media posts and trends is in. That's my personal view.

Here's the shocker: Politicians aren't to blame for most of what is going wrong in our society. The problem is US. It's worth thinking about.

For the purposes of a forum, it's best to not take it too seriously, imo. If you're holding grudges, or judging people based solely on their political view, then you're probably in a little too deep. But overall, we have a rule here that prevents the forum becoming a flaming pile of sticks, and we should be grateful. :D
 
@VaughanJB
"Here's the shocker: Politicians aren't to blame for most of what is going wrong in our society. The problem is US. It's worth thinking about."

Absolutely, Positively True, IMO
 
CallMeKate said:
Is "truth" not subjective, though? What you call "truth" may be a dung pile of malarkey to me. 🤷‍♀️ And what I'd swear was "truth" may appear to you to be nothing more than spin/propaganda. No matter how you word it, it still boils down to individual perception.
Click to expand...
What about actual FACTS? How have they become so twisted? How can Facts be perceived differently?
 
hollydolly said:
As one of the longest members here I can answer that. Simply that Politics used to be allowed..and the blood letting among some people was just ruining what was a good forum.. and causing Admin all sort of problems.. hence the ban !...
Click to expand...
While I'm not as senior a member as hollydolly, I was here when politics was a forum category. It was not a really civil discussion, it was running arguments, with post after post of angry, personal attacks. But the hostility didn't stay in the "politics" section, it spilled into every other topic. I was kind of upset with the ban on politics, but after a while, instead those "pig headed idiots" became friendly daily visitors. I agree with hollydolly that banning politics was a good decision that saved the forum.
 
dilettante said:
So trust in authority handed down from above? Next stop devine monarchy?

Oh. Nevermind.
Click to expand...

For me it is more about appreciation to the person willing to do the unpleasant job of moderating a forum, especially when it is flourishing under tgat moderation. I feel the same way about anyone who will clean the kitchen; I won’t argue about how to do it unless I’m able and willing to take on the job.
 
Last edited:
CallMeKate said:
Is "truth" not subjective, though? What you call "truth" may be a dung pile of malarkey to me. 🤷‍♀️ And what I'd swear was "truth" may appear to you to be nothing more than spin/propaganda. No matter how you word it, it still boils down to individual perception.
Click to expand...
Well, truth is independent of perception. Something can be true, even if no one on the planet believes it to be true, and conversely, something can be false even if everyone believes it to be true.

Our experience of reality, on the other hand, is subjective, and therefore reliant on our perception. We use language to describe things, and language is malleable, interpreted, and often misunderstood. But none of this alters truth. I may say it is true or false, but it doesn't make it so, or alter facts.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top