[2006alum]

Adopting Terry's wise admonition:

I support the CardBoard's long-standing "no politics" rule. As I understand it, the moderators have relaxed that rule for the purpose of allowing discussion of the political response to Covid-19. I'd be favor of limiting the political comments to that issue. Posts [that] have nothing to do with Covid-19 [. . .] would be better avoided, IMO.

Thus, if a thread veers away from COVID-19 altogether for a few posts, the Mods will reserve the right to close it. This seems to be a better system than haphazardly giving out ad-hoc warnings.

[2006alum]

Adopting Terry's wise admonition:

I support the CardBoard's long-standing "no politics" rule. As I understand it, the moderators have relaxed that rule for the purpose of allowing discussion of the political response to Covid-19. I'd be favor of limiting the political comments to that issue. Posts [that] have nothing to do with Covid-19 [. . .] would be better avoided, IMO.

Thus, if a thread veers away from COVID-19 altogether for a few posts, the Mods will reserve the right to close it. This seems to be a better system than haphazardly giving out ad-hoc warnings.

[Mick]

Adopting Terry's wise admonition:

I support the CardBoard's long-standing "no politics" rule. As I understand it, the moderators have relaxed that rule for the purpose of allowing discussion of the political response to Covid-19. I'd be favor of limiting the political comments to that issue. Posts [that] have nothing to do with Covid-19 [. . .] would be better avoided, IMO.

Thus, if a thread veers away from COVID-19 altogether for a few posts, the Mods will reserve the right to close it. This seems to be a better system than haphazardly giving out ad-hoc warnings.

Agreed.  I applaud your thread closures on this nonpolitical board, which has become political in the majority of threads.

Just a little food for thought, but I've noted that the moderators of this board let the political opinions run, as long as they're generally or particularly anti-Trump.  I don't care for it, because I have noted that threads get closed as soon as someone reveals a political opinion that, while the opinion may be largely anti-Trump, the opinion doesn't slavishly follow the anti-Trump opinions in toto.  At that point, someone usually demands the thread be closed and the mods do it.  

We all have our political opinions.  I've never been one to shout other people down or tell people they should back off, or shouldn't speak, or shouldn't share their opinions.  But a fair number of people on this site do just that.  I'm confused as to why a putatively non-political board has such an overt political leaning.

Just food for thought.

[Mick]

Adopting Terry's wise admonition:

I support the CardBoard's long-standing "no politics" rule. As I understand it, the moderators have relaxed that rule for the purpose of allowing discussion of the political response to Covid-19. I'd be favor of limiting the political comments to that issue. Posts [that] have nothing to do with Covid-19 [. . .] would be better avoided, IMO.

Thus, if a thread veers away from COVID-19 altogether for a few posts, the Mods will reserve the right to close it. This seems to be a better system than haphazardly giving out ad-hoc warnings.

Agreed.  I applaud your thread closures on this nonpolitical board, which has become political in the majority of threads.

Just a little food for thought, but I've noted that the moderators of this board let the political opinions run, as long as they're generally or particularly anti-Trump.  I don't care for it, because I have noted that threads get closed as soon as someone reveals a political opinion that, while the opinion may be largely anti-Trump, the opinion doesn't slavishly follow the anti-Trump opinions in toto.  At that point, someone usually demands the thread be closed and the mods do it.  

We all have our political opinions.  I've never been one to shout other people down or tell people they should back off, or shouldn't speak, or shouldn't share their opinions.  But a fair number of people on this site do just that.  I'm confused as to why a putatively non-political board has such an overt political leaning.

Just food for thought.

[2006alum]

As I said in the most recent thread that got closed, if you come across several political posts in a row that aren't related to COVID-19, please holler and we'll shut it down -- regardless of viewpoint.

[2006alum]

As I said in the most recent thread that got closed, if you come across several political posts in a row that aren't related to COVID-19, please holler and we'll shut it down -- regardless of viewpoint.

[oldalum]

Agreed.  I applaud your thread closures on this nonpolitical board, which has become political in the majority of threads.

I agree too. So I'm hoping to understand the purpose of your initial post in starting that now-closed thread, because the only one I can think of was to provoke a political mudfight. I read the article you linked, which I thought was a very sober, even-handed analysis of both the likely Democratic and Republican strategies for the election (it was published in the Examiner, after all). Both strategies seem to me to have reasonable arguments in support of them. Yet you took an extreme take on one side's strategy and made it the focus of a new thread. Predictably, it incited a partisan political response. (as you can see from the thread in question, I posted the first response, in which I said basically that. Then I thought better and deleted it, figuring I'd just be fueling the flames)

I usually learn a lot from your posts, so did I just miss the point?

[oldalum]

Agreed.  I applaud your thread closures on this nonpolitical board, which has become political in the majority of threads.

I agree too. So I'm hoping to understand the purpose of your initial post in starting that now-closed thread, because the only one I can think of was to provoke a political mudfight. I read the article you linked, which I thought was a very sober, even-handed analysis of both the likely Democratic and Republican strategies for the election (it was published in the Examiner, after all). Both strategies seem to me to have reasonable arguments in support of them. Yet you took an extreme take on one side's strategy and made it the focus of a new thread. Predictably, it incited a partisan political response. (as you can see from the thread in question, I posted the first response, in which I said basically that. Then I thought better and deleted it, figuring I'd just be fueling the flames)

I usually learn a lot from your posts, so did I just miss the point?

[stupac2]

As a reminder, if you use the "report" button all moderators get an e-mail immediately. It's also helpful to add a comment, sometimes we get reports and it's just the default "violates forum rules" but I'm genuinely unsure why it was reported. So adding "Terry rule" is helpful.

[stupac2]

As a reminder, if you use the "report" button all moderators get an e-mail immediately. It's also helpful to add a comment, sometimes we get reports and it's just the default "violates forum rules" but I'm genuinely unsure why it was reported. So adding "Terry rule" is helpful.

[JustAnotherFan]

Everything is political. Partisan is a better word in my opinion.

[JustAnotherFan]

Everything is political. Partisan is a better word in my opinion.

[2006alum]

I think the rule is pretty clear. It's darned near impossible to discuss COVID-19 in any meaningful way without some policy/politics creeping into the discussion, especially critiques of government responses. So if politics creeps into discussion about response to COVID-19, fine. Once it becomes a free-flowing, un-COVID-19-related discussion of politics, reelection, etc., anyone can flash the bat signal and if we agree, we will close the thread. As Stupac2 alluded, the "report" function pings all Mods, but be sure to explain your rationale. Otherwise you can just post in the thread itself, as several of you have done.

If you want politics free cardboarding, go back whence you came, and head to the main CARDboard. I'm closing this thread now too. Feel free to ping me and others if you have further questions.

[2006alum]

I think the rule is pretty clear. It's darned near impossible to discuss COVID-19 in any meaningful way without some policy/politics creeping into the discussion, especially critiques of government responses. So if politics creeps into discussion about response to COVID-19, fine. Once it becomes a free-flowing, un-COVID-19-related discussion of politics, reelection, etc., anyone can flash the bat signal and if we agree, we will close the thread. As Stupac2 alluded, the "report" function pings all Mods, but be sure to explain your rationale. Otherwise you can just post in the thread itself, as several of you have done.

If you want politics free cardboarding, go back whence you came, and head to the main CARDboard. I'm closing this thread now too. Feel free to ping me and others if you have further questions.

[admin]

As a reminder, if you use the "report" button all moderators get an e-mail immediately. It's also helpful to add a comment, sometimes we get reports and it's just the default "violates forum rules" but I'm genuinely unsure why it was reported. So adding "Terry rule" is helpful.

I agree. I often can't figure out what the person reporting has found objectionable. Notes are helpful.

[admin]

As a reminder, if you use the "report" button all moderators get an e-mail immediately. It's also helpful to add a comment, sometimes we get reports and it's just the default "violates forum rules" but I'm genuinely unsure why it was reported. So adding "Terry rule" is helpful.

I agree. I often can't figure out what the person reporting has found objectionable. Notes are helpful.