What the Backroom is good for, and what it is not

[edyzmedieval]

Philippus, while I mostly agree with your sentiments, it's important to consider that tempers do flare up when discussing politics. And they flare up quickly. Any hard hitting attacks will be just as forcefully dealt with, be assured of that, but we cannot act as thought police for the Backroom . We're all here to debate, discuss and we get aggrieved sometimes. Correct observation you make, hence why I would like to mention that although a leeway is given, any strong reactions will be taken care of.

Speak softly and carry a big stick.

Also, I'm glad it was a fruitful night.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Philippus, while I mostly agree with your sentiments, it's important to consider that tempers do flare up when discussing politics. And they flare up quickly. Any hard hitting attacks will be just as forcefully dealt with, be assured of that, but we cannot act as thought police for the Backroom . We're all here to debate, discuss and we get aggrieved sometimes. Correct observation you make, hence why I would like to mention that although a leeway is given, any strong reactions will be taken care of.

Speak softly and carry a big stick.

Also, I'm glad it was a fruitful night.

Ah, it was not a fruitful night - I edited the post.

I got into a fight with a (male) friend of my sister over something as banal as whether or not people are actually tabula raza - I don't believe they are - but according to him that makes me a closed minded a elitist person simply because I have a belief he doesn't agree with.

This is something we see increasingly in the backroom from all sides - disagreement is taken to be indicative of a moral fault.

[Montmorency]

This is something we see increasingly in the backroom from all sides - disagreement is taken to be indicative of a moral fault.

That's not generally what I'm doing though, and as an aside I hope you recognize that sometimes disagreement can be indicative of a moral fault.

Monty wears me down sometimes, and Pan about the Brexit. Mostly I enjoy the interplay.

I understand the ideal is not to try to "persuade" anyone of anything but leave them to independently come to a similar conclusion indirectly. Call it a limitation. I've never been able to formulate a gentle process to introduce the assertion that available evidence significantly undermines one's assumptions or interpretations. Sorry.