08-08-2018, 03:55 PM
JASmith Wrote:L1955, I view you as one of the good guys.
Nonetheless, your post opens the door for a direct discussion of online behavior and, in particular, forum member responses to Stan's posts.
Yes, Stan does cause some of to think.
Nonetheless, we see a pattern of contrarian posts that give an appearance of being anti (whatever is being discussed). Some new information is usually brought to light in the first few posts of the ensuing debates and arguments. Sadly, Stan's dogged unwillingness to compromise leads to reflected hard positions on other's parts and the added information content rapidly diminishes.
I concur with the view that the debate is needed. But the patterns suggest that we need to see these 2A -- and some technical topics -- get shut down before about 50 posts. Why 50? Personally, I'd rather see it done at 25 before the untoward bickering fully develops. The pattern suggests that 50 is enough to demonstrate that no new information or insight is being developed in almost every case.
So, yes, we need to keep the 2A forum going. Yes we need to encourage pro-active discussion on what we can do individually and collectively to strengthen the Bill of Rights. BUT, we do need to more aggressively shut down threads that become repetitive arguments.
JAS:
We agree mostly.
I will continue to shut down threads that turn into inane bickering or stupid accusations.
One thing anyone can learn from this experience with the 2A thread is that it truly does represent freedom and that freedom is only possible with conflicting views and the ability to express them without fear of retribution. It ain't 'free'.
I will defend anyone who has a decent argument to make, even if I don't agree. I will not defend someone who makes a accusation, is insulting to someone, or disagrees without backing up their statement. Fair game to me. If someone has the gumption to post a disagreement over something, they can take the time to say why.
I am not going to shut down a 2A thread because of a quota. I view that as an act of censorship and I don't go for it one bit. If John wants such control over the 2A Forum he can set something up that will lock the thread at a certain number of posts, I am sure.
I have no solution. I refuse to ban or censor anyone with a differing opinion -- unless they become abusive or use profane and vulgar language. I guess both sides better deal with it, just like Americans have dealt with it for a couple hundred years.
LR55