You've switched from vast swathes of the population that some think fit the wide definition of racist and whom we should seek engagement with, to the narrow definition where I agree with Wookie and wouldn't ally with them.

That sort of silly rhetorical trick on your part does you no credit even if you fool a few people. The converstaion stsrted from a point by Bundy - if you're genuinely comparing pposters such as him to the NF then you've lost it completely.

I’ve decided moderation is so 2005. It’s not like people still play poker so all the forums should be wide open for various groups of horrible people.

How was Bush re-elected then?

Oh cool so I'm sure when you were given your own forum to mod it definitely did not become infested with pedophilia defending white supremacists?

And if it did become so infested, surely you allowed people to confront them with policies, progressive views, protest? Certainly that didn't devolve into you constantly giving out green text warnings and infractions to people who actually confronted your Nazi friends.

****ing quisling.

Like I know fascists and the bizarre fash sympathizing beard-stroking nerd subculture are all very very stupid people, but none of this is a hypothetical.

We gave them what they wanted and the subforum ended up getting closed because Mat's delightful Afro-Asian friend kept on bragging about hate crimes he wanted to commit and chezlaw's "lol kiddie Nazis" were claiming Heather Heyer was a crisis actor whogot bussed into Charlottesville by George Soros to do a false flag.

So when they ask for P7.1 you need to ask them what has changed.

Out of vague curiosity I've been perusing a few other politics forums. Cliffs: they are all unmitigated **** shows. Whatever faults the 2+2 politics forum may have, it has easily one of the most intelligent group of posters of any forum I've found. Which is something I appreciate, both in regard to the posters and the modding.

Really? Did you look at r/politics? It seems pretty trivial to find much better posters/commenters all over the place.

I don’t even really read 538, but briefly looking at a few comment threads, some stuff over there is way too intelligent for 2+2politics. A few dozen people seem able to make correct points and have conversations that require understanding high school level statistics. Granted I don’t spend much time on other politics forums (or even politics here anymore for that matter) but a 10 min search seriously calls your claim into question.

I wasn't considering the comments section on 538 to be a discussion forum, but it doesn't surprise me that their commenters are well above average. I definitely ought to look more at reddit, but I have a prejudice: I've always hated their interface.

Anyway, I wasn't intending to make any claims in the persuasive or argumentative sense. The context for my comment is that I've been somewhat critical of the politics forum for a while, I valued PU/P7 when it existed (n.b. despite its obvious flaws), I've been interested in the idea of a second forum, etc. So I suppose my ambition was more to try to remind myself that I do actually like the politics forum in a lot of ways, compared to the kinds of discussion forums I've visited that might be something like what an alternative forum would really be like.

But I made no attempt to be systematic or scientific in my perusal. It's just my minimally and haphazardly informed opinion. YMMV.

Perhaps now you can appreciate why ~all of the regs didn’t want you rebooting P88 and inviting all of your clowndick SMP friends.

If I had no appreciation for your opinions we would have opened a new forum ~10 months ago. On the other hand, "clowndick" is a really great word. :P

More seriously I only haven't locked this thread because I figured I'd let bundy have a bit longer for his poll and to post something about it, if he wants, but my impression is that "do nothing at all" is the correct final outcome here, and Regrets is right that TTHRIC

I wouldn’t mind seeing one more Morphismus meme before the thread gets shut down.

I'm willing to go LSAT score 4Rollz vs 538 forums.

Straw man. There exist different degrees of awfulness. Some of the awfuls are that way inclined because they haven't been exposed to better arguments, or had their ideas challenged well. The more hardline awfuls (diehard NF members in this example) are mostly beyond hope.

We can easily divide 2+2s far right into those two groups. I'll let you play that game on your own. Best to lock this thread before you start getting tearful about missing the child-punching, wife-beating, trans-assaulting racists you did so much to protect.

I noticed the perpetually outraged are still finding an excuse to project their hate in the thread (they didn't belong in the first place) and are now dragging way off topic. High five

As mentioned this is how I was temp banned for sexism on my first day in wookies "politics" section. He has been asked repeatedly to explain himself (including itt) and refused to even attempt to justify his actions
Original Post:
This came out today. Spoiler alert, dog parks are rape culture and ....

The makes the wage gap myth look like rocket science

https://quillette.com/2018/10/01/the...emics-respond/

Hahaha, WE are the ones perpetually outraged? It is always projection.

Yes it's your strawman. There is a wide range of people, who the liberal/left disagree with. Refusing to engage with such a wide range, that it's huge swathes of the electorate is a polarising catastrophe in a demoracy,

Feel feel to agree/disagree with that if you want (or contuinue with the NF strawman - it's your choice)

decent effort at amusing nonsense but you're competing with some serious talent in this thread

Juan, seriously, no one cares. I'm not sure what it's gonna take to get that through to you, but your life will improve if it ever does.

I'm not entirely sure what Juan is trying to say, but it looks like part of the problem is he doesn't know the difference between science and humanities journals.

His argument is plainly that because a favored YouTube video says a recent social science study is bad, therefore it is proof that the whole field is bad, and also that his baseless and sexist smear against the liberal posters here and against the humanities in general to which I attached the infraction associated with his ban is therefore correct and some sort of substantive contribution that is being censored rather than what it actually is. You see, it is us who are perpetually outraged, not the guy nursing a year old grudge.

If the "recent social science study" in question is the one from Affilia (article title not given), then my point is that it's not a social science journal, at least as far as I can tell. It's a feminist social work journal. It looks like at least some of the articles they publish attempt to use some qualitative social science research methods, but they advertise themselves as "offering a unique mix of research reports, new theory and other creative approaches" (emphasis mine).

Which is not to say that they ought not be embarrassed if they published some creative rewrite of Mein Kampf. That might be too creative :P

I should have said publication instead of study, granted.

Question - is there any minimum standard of study, publication or source that one should use?

I'm thinking appropriate to link to a paper from a university but inappropriate to link to a paper from a law centre, news website or institute who has various political leanings (institute of public affairs, for instance). Obviously linking to youtube is inappropriate unless it is a link for example to a lecture given at a university and sanctioned by them.

Thoughts?

Does the publication support conspiracy theories? Do they support pseudo scientific theories? Do they promote hate speech? Do they use the term SJW seriously? How long would someone have to look around the website to realize they have a huge bias?

kerowo and bundy sitting in a tree?

i have no intention of doing so, but if i was to be participating in the politics forum and referenced some piece of information from the following documentary, would that also be frowned upon?

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3738872/