Trump administration will identify and eliminate cause of autism 'by September'

[Trollheart]

The point here is that, whatever you think, when someone clearly says STOP, then you should stop. You don't keep poking with a stick to see if you can get a reaction. It's about consent really, and once it's clear the consent (to have a debate/argument/fight/discussion/delete as appropriate) is revoked, then both people should pull back. Constantly ribbing people who clearly are not impressed does nobody any favours. You may prove a point, perhaps, but you're in danger of losing people's respect and of putting others in a difficult position. Jesus again: think about your actions and ask yourself what would you do in their place?

Oh, and to answer your question, JJ: anyone clearly identifying as a Trump supporter would not be refused membership or anything, but given the hateful and untrue rhetoric the administration is putting about, they would need to understand that they would have to behave, or would be responded to accordingly. As a pure off the top of my head example, let's say a Trump supporter came here saying WE WON IN 2020, there is no way that would be allowed to stand without a lot of heated debate. There may be Trump/MAGAs who can debate seriously and politely and respectfully, but if they can't, then we'd have to look at the whole issue. We're not about to allow this place to become a sounding board for Trump, not when so many people here are being oppressed by his government.

[Lexi of the Dawn]

The thread we're discussing, I said the extra loophole was harsh, stupid and unfair. This is what I mean when I say I generally agree with the view. I didn't say the extra difficulty applying for a visa was justified. I didn't say I agreed with it or supported it. I actually made it clear that I DIDN'T agree with it, but even that isn't enough. What I took issue with was the idea that trans people are now denied entry to the USA. I am absolutely not apologising for that.

I don't think you should apologize either, I think you got hung up on the semantics of the wording of the headline and jumped to assuming something I don't think the article was implying. I think you're jumping to assuming the most extreme of anyone on a different side of the political spectrum as you. I'm guilty of that too sometimes, and I try to check myself on it and back off and self reflect on my potential biases. I think maybe you need to do that more often.

With regards to the trans thread, I have done nothing if not provide backing and reasoning for my claims; you were ignoring them and instead shifting focus to debating these rigid statements I wasn't even saying. I explained why the visa denial is a deterrent for trans people to enter the country to the point where the amount of hoops to jump through makes it probably not worth it to try to come to America (thus the policy accomplishing its goal) and the first thing you can say is to get defensive and say "well actually technically it's not a total ban" when neither I nor the article was saying that. It was saying that people's visas are being denied because they're trans, rendering them unable to enter the US for as long as they have a correct gender ID. Nothing more, nothing less. You jumped to assuming the most extreme reading possible of the article's headline, the only person sensationalizing anything was you.

And for the record, I am absolutely not "far left" by any metric and I'm sure anyone who is in regular communication with me outside of this forum will back me up on this lol. I don't think you're a Trump supporter, if you say you're not then I take you at your word. I think you are overly quick to make assumptions about the intentions of people on other sides of the political spectrum and you jump in to make some bizarrely presumptive statements on things you don't actually know anything about. Did you even research the process and logistics of a gender marker change in Canada before you shared your assertion on trans Canadians' options for entering the US? It feels like you're speaking over people who actually went through that process of changing gender marker and know the logistics of it.

When someone is airing their frustration about a policy that negatively affects them, it's unhelpful to come in and tell them about how much you think they're being sensationalist. And then doubling down when you have the nuances explained to you.

[Guybrush]

For the record, I do feel like if you make a thread or a post, you have consented to people replying to you in accordance with the rules. If you regret that decision, the onus should be on you to simply drop it and not engage further. If people continue posting and you find it troublesome, consider asking a mod to lock the thread.

In a perfect world, we respect each other despite differences of opinions and value the interesting discussion that can rise from that. It's ambitious and a difficult balance, but one I hope we can strive towards.

[Trollheart]

I'm not sure I understand this. Are you saying that Tristan and Lexi should not have responded, and let JJ snark all over their thread? Cos, you know, I don't think that's right or helpful. That seems a little like victim blaming to me. I assume I took that up wrong, but maybe you might set me right.

[Lexi of the Dawn]

Technically it's Mindy's thread, but either way my view is that the difference of opinion was not the problem here, but the way those opinions were expressed. In Jimmy's case I thought his disagreement with Tristan's posts was expressed in a very rude and mocking way and did not invite discussion or address any of the matters Tristan was talking about. Snide remarks don't qualify as interesting discussion imo.

I am of the mind that we should all work together to cultivate an environment where we can emphasize engaging in conversations, so I agree with your core point, Guybrush. I personally think being rude and dismissive toward other members while not contributing much if at all to the actual discussion being had is antithetical to that environment. I think we should all encourage fruitful discussion here and have some degree of etiquette toward each other.

[jimmy jazz]

In Jimmy's case I thought his disagreement with Tristan's posts was expressed in a very rude and mocking way and did not invite discussion or address any of the matters Tristan was talking about. Snide remarks don't qualify as interesting discussion imo.

Why didn't you say anything to Tristan when she did it to me then?

https://scd.community/index.php?msg=37017

That wasn't the only post in that thread either.

No doubt you'll defend that and say it was different when Tristan did it.

[Trollheart]

I don't see any correlation. You had one opinion, Tristan disagreed, you discussed. Whether or not you came to any accommodation I can't say right now as I don't have the time to read the whole discussion. But in this thread your response to her, which was uninvited, was a snide smart remark which you then doubled down on. Show me how that equates to the example you posted, cos I don't see it.

And ideally, stop calling everyone who disagrees with you or has different views "left" - that's not something you know, and only telegraphs the idea that you're very much of the other persuasion. Only those on the right keep trying to demonise those they see as on the left.

Also, incidentally, since you bring it up in the thread, and to use your own tactics, can you post examples of "those on the right" condemning Jan 6th? Cos I ain't seen a single one who wasn't crowing about it and calling it a day of liberation etc. Maybe I just missed that, so if you could point me in that direction?

[Trollheart]

Okay, I've taken the time to read through from that post on to the end of the thread. First, FYI, I personally called Tristan out here https://scd.community/index.php?msg=36983 not against you but because I disagreed with what they said. So if you think I'm being biased or taking one side against the other, that should show I am, at the very least, an equal opportunities asshole. Second, the rest of your posts in that thread simply conform to and confirm your "left are scum/right are not so bad when you get to know them" mantra which is blatantly untrue. It's just more of the same shit, trying to absolve (some of/most of/the majority of) the right while painting all those you see as being on the left with the one pretty ignorant brush.

I don't see how that helps your cause at all.

[jimmy jazz]

I did not discuss anything with Tristan until after that. It started with that snarky comment. There is no difference whatsoever.

And ideally, stop calling everyone who disagrees with you or has different views "left" - that's not something you know, and only telegraphs the idea that you're very much of the other persuasion. Only those on the right keep trying to demonise those they see as on the left.

Yet it's fine for people to call me a right winger when they disagree with me (I am not a right winger). Also I did not say everyone who disagrees with me is left. You've completely made that up.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/one-year-ago-republicans-condemned-jan-6-insurrection-yesterday-their-response-was-far-more-muted

I await the next moving of the goalposts.

Second, the rest of your posts in that thread simply conform to and confirm your "left are scum/right are not so bad when you get to know them" mantra which is blatantly untrue.

Not what I said at all.

[Jwb]

Honestly this place is a boring echo chamber where the only confrontation to be had is in the form of these kinds of petty disputes.   We need some proper Trump supporters to join. If you disagree with that,  I hate you and I hope you're sent to a FEMA camp. 

[Key]

This is just getting ridiculous at this point. Tristan hasn't responded in quite some time so maybe best to push this into private messages and resolve the matter so this thread doesn't become a constant back and forth battle.

[Guybrush]

I'm not sure I understand this. Are you saying that Tristan and Lexi should not have responded, and let JJ snark all over their thread? Cos, you know, I don't think that's right or helpful. That seems a little like victim blaming to me. I assume I took that up wrong, but maybe you might set me right.

I'm not really addressing this, but giving just a little pushback on what you wrote about consent. I think posting on a forum is, by its nature, inviting others to reply. If you share a site with people on opposite sides of an issue, that means you're also inviting them to respond. Naturally, they might write something you don't agree with, but.. you also invited them to do just that when you made your post.

Retracting this consent is something you can try, but.. these situations likely won't happen until there's some level of conflict involved and in that state, how often would people comply? Put into system, it seems to me like it could increase conflict by introducing expectations that won't be met (that someone stop posting) and generate more grounds for accusations (why didn't you stop when I retracted my consent?).

I know we provide a place where people from opposite sides of an argument can discuss things. The political discussion between SGR and Lisnaholic is such a great example of this. What I'm less sure of is whether we're providing a safe space for people to vent where they can expect to make posts and not have people on opposite sides of the issue write replies. I don't think this is something we provide, at least not until we're a full blown echo chamber and I think that would be worse and less interesting overall. So I think you can try to safely vent here, but your peace may be disturbed.

Sometimes, the best thing is to adapt to the environment instead of expecting the environment to adapt to you. If a topic is too depressing or unpleasant, then consider not engaging with it. If someone makes a post that is not breaking the rules, but you think it's a stinker and not worth your time, consider ignoring it. If you want a place to vent where no one from the opposite side of the issue will disturb you, consider doing it on the discord or someplace else that's a little more like an echo chamber.

I consider myself left and largely stay out of these discussions because I find them frustrating, but I still think we have to find the right balance so this place hopefully doesn't become just another echo chamber on the internet. The diversity of our community is part what makes us special, I think. Being able to connect across these differences is a beautiful thing. To preserve this, we gotta be a little careful that we don't cater to one side of an issue, but rather to principles that apply to all equally.

[Guybrush]

About the going-ons in this thread, there was some nastiness early on that shouldn't have occurred (like merely replying with lol). My reason for posting the above wasn't to address this, but comes in part from a wish to not completely alienate people of moderate or more right leaning political views.

[Trollheart]

Hey look, I'm happy to leave it at that, but if more snarky comments are posted for no reason, by anyone, which fail to take into account how damaging or hurtful they may be to another poster, then I'll continue to call them out. I don't want real conflict here, and I certainly don't want to be picking on anyone, but we do have rules and if posts begin to escalate into what could be termed personal attacks, I'll address them. I'm not looking to stifle comment or discussion either, but there has to be an understanding that, as has been said before, on the other side of these keyboards and mice and fingers, behind the phones and the computers and the usernames and internet identities are real people, some of whom are hurting in a very real way, and I just think trivialising or making fun of, or even questioning their pain is not the way we should be behaving.

If I went too harsh with JJ and seemed to attack him, then I'm not immune from criticism, and I was once wrong, in December of 1989 I think, so I'm no better than most. But with the way the world is now, the way the internet is going and the way human dignity is being attacked and a really dark cloud is descending over us, I think we all need to be more tolerant and supportive of each other.

And that includes me.

So apologies JJ; didn't mean to attack you and if I did that was wrong, but I hope we won't see any more of this kind of behaviour. Nobody needs it and really, what purpose does it serve?

[Trollheart]

This is just getting ridiculous at this point. Tristan hasn't responded in quite some time so maybe best to push this into private messages and resolve the matter so this thread doesn't become a constant back and forth battle.

Incidentally, just so you know, I wasn't saying anything more but JJ asked a question which I then responded to. Part of that response was that I hadn't read through the thread he referenced, so my second response was that I had read it and that was what I thought. I wasn't trying to bring the issue back up, just responding.