doclinkin wrote:Meh. I consistently welcome opposing opinions and learn a great deal from this thread -- yourself, da1andonly, a few others --and even when I disagree it forces me to do the research and come back with receipts. I agree there are pointless insults flung about, but don't beat up monte about it since the tone was established in this thread by pine early on that we allow for a bit more rough and tumble conversation here than in other threads. We are going to disagree, sometimes heatedly, about things that actually matter. Basketball pretty much doesn't, unless you're in the sports industry. I personally find it somewhat absurd that people who support a party and particularly a president, who regularly breaks the norms of polite discourse, get their actual feelings hurt when they bump into an off color word. Still, I think it doesn't help the debate, just shuts it off. I'd rather fight it out. But then I'm the guy who started the insults and trolling thread.
As for the value of the thread. Personally I appreciate the insiders look at the local industry. There are plenty of ways to distract ourselves with the 'bread and circus' of sports etc, but few places where you can hear from people who are a couple degrees of separation away from decision makers. I have dozens of other interests, writing, art, etc, that draw my time, especially since I seem to need less sleep than most people, but come back here because of the brainy discourse, whether on sports or policy. Seems dumb to read the thread and then say you don't think you should have read it. Shrug.
So. Seems similarly silly to pop in and ask for people to cordially invite you back, then drop an insult on your way out the door. Doesn't really add anything to the conversation. If you have information or an opinion, bring it here. Just don't expect people to always be measured or reasonable in the back and forth. People are pissed. An unelected un vetted trillionaire with red flag conflicts of interests has appointed himself a super cabinet member, without oversight check or balance and is dismantling the concept of governance. If anybody wants to step in here to defend that with facts and links and citations, I'd love to hear it. But don't flinch and be a pantswetter if someone loudly disagrees with you. Just come back with better facts. Or even, maybe, listen and be convinced. Or hell, admit when your party got it wrong. And be willing to do something to fix it.
I appreciate the post but I have no desire to reenter the thread. In fact I'm certain I won't. But highly partisan and personal attacks like "you're a piece of sh$t, and a liar and evil" might dissuade others with differing viewpoints from participating.
