US Politics |OT|

[firebush03]

Ryuu96 said:

firebush03 said:

In defense of the person you’re responding to: “3 people responded…you didn’t even bother to address a single one” sounds like the forum dog-pilled and the user (rationally) concluded that it wasn’t worth the energy to respond. I feel like there should be some moderation that prevents such aggressive ganging, as it only leads to an echo chamber.

I can’t even speak freely of my stances here b/c — as I have learned three times — I’ll be crucified by like twenty people lol.

Err, I'm going to be blunt but that is called disagreement, it happens in debate, if a user can't handle it then they shouldn't bother trying to debate in the first place. We're not going to start moderating users for disagreeing with other users. If you have an unpopular opinion then naturally a few people are going to disagree with you and damn, 3 people isn't even that many at all, Lol.

Are users meant to elect someone to speak on behalf of the collective opinion? How do they organise that? How do we know what other peoples opinions are before they post? Lol. Are we as Moderators meant to say "Ah, one person has responded to this user in disagreement, therefore nobody else is allowed to respond to this user". Even when people have similar disagreements, they post different perspectives still and things that other people have not thought of. I know there's a lot of times where I've disagreed with someone and posted my opinion but another user has posted a far better detailed disagreement rebuttal than I did.

Fair enough if a dog-pile on a specific user is dragging a thread off-topic but...That's not the case here. I think it's a far bigger issue when a user pops into this thread every few months with a hot-take or argument bait, only to immediately vanish and not respond to anyone's responses, thus wasting everyone's time, which is a common trend with fans of a certain politician who just want to drop a grenade and run.

I don't see why we should do anything about you having an unpopular opinion.

IG I’m still just a little traumatized by my experience with this thread lol. It’s easy to talk one-on-one; it’s not so easy when talking three-on-one. I agree that 3-to-1 is not much of a “dogpile,” though it is undesirable and def does enable an echo chamber to form; hence, why I believe there should be some protections for people who leave a comment which many disagree with here (within reason ofc. I’m not advocating for protection of somebody defending the Holocaust). Maybe it could be something simple like, “If you two want to debate, please take it to PM. Otherwise, you will be thread banned.”

Last edited by firebush03 - on 13 June 2025