nonpolitical medical issues

[Milwaukee]

I can play this game all day?

 

[ramblinwreckguru]

Question for the mods. Is discussing the origins of Covid 19 and whether or not American doctors were complicit in the creation of the virus off limits?

 

[4shotB]

Question for the mods. Is discussing the origins of Covid 19 and whether or not American doctors were complicit in the creation of the virus off limits?

Generally speaking I would be okay with those topics as long as the post is science based and not opinion based. But before I posted anything, I would ask myself if the post, info, link, etc. that I am about to share is scientific in nature or political in nature. Could others perceive it as political.? If I wasn't sure I would refrain from posting.

Again, the next post that crosses that threshold will be the last Covid post on this site. I don't know how to communicate that any more clearly. I will be happy to assist others in finding other internet forums more suited for this topic.

 

[ramblinwreckguru]

Generally speaking I would be okay with those topics as long as the post is science based and not opinion based. But before I posted anything, I would ask myself if the post, info, link, etc. that I am about to share is scientific in nature or political in nature. Could others perceive it as political.? If I wasn't sure I would refrain from posting.

Again, the next post that crosses that threshold will be the last Covid post on this site. I don't know how to communicate that any more clearly. I will be happy to assist others in finding other internet forums more suited for this topic.

I'm confused. I thought this message board was for GT fans to express their opinions on different topics. Now you're saying that unless we can prove our post as fact, it's not allowed? Does the same principle apply to all other topics as well? Just trying to understand these new rules of the site.

 

[4shotB]

I'm confused. I thought this message board was for GT fans to express their opinions on different topics. Now you're saying that unless we can prove our post as fact, it's not allowed? Does the same principle apply to all other topics as well? Just trying to understand these new rules of the site.

Let me help with your confusion. No poitics allowed here unless in the political forum. I think the message has been clear. Pehaps not the execution by the staff, which maybe has helped in the confusion. That's unfortunate but a reality. Anything else?

 

[ramblinwreckguru]

Let me help with your confusion. No poitics allowed here unless in the political forum. I think the message has been clear. Pehaps not the execution by the staff, which maybe has helped in the confusion. That's unfortunate but a reality. Anything else?

Yes. I see a lot of things being said here (etc. about Fauci and his dealings with the Wuhan lab) that I wouldn't deem as being political, but the moderators have had a different opinion than I on those posts. Evidently, I don't have a very good grasp on what is political per this board and what is not. Could you provide a definition as to what being political means on this board so I can stay away from those type posts?

 

[4shotB]

Yes. I see a lot of things being said here (etc. about Fauci and his dealings with the Wuhan lab) that I wouldn't deem as being political, but the moderators have had a different opinion than I on those posts. Evidently, I don't have a very good grasp on what is political per this board and what is not. Could you provide a definition as to what being political means on this board so I can stay away from those type posts?

I am trusting that the link below will be sufficient.

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/political

 

[ramblinwreckguru]

I am trusting that the link below will be sufficient.

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/political

Got it. I will just assume that this applies to everyone on this board the same.

 

[GT_EE78]

Let me help with your confusion. No poitics allowed here unless in the political forum. I think the message has been clear. Pehaps not the execution by the staff, which maybe has helped in the confusion. That's unfortunate but a reality. Anything else?

As I'm sure you know, not everyone is allowed to participate in that political subforum, partly because there was a time period when moderation in that subforum was agenda driven rather than rules based. My recollection from that time period is that one of the mods said that in the future those subforum rules could reviewed and changed at moderator discretion.Maybe things would be easier if everyone could put gray area things there and mods could save time and energy by pushing any gray area post to there?
So, my question is whether or not mods have have discussed subforum rules modification or plan to in near future?

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

As I'm sure you know, not everyone is allowed to participate in that political subforum, partly because there was a time period when moderation in that subforum was agenda driven rather than rules based. My recollection from that time period is that one of the mods said that in the future those subforum rules could reviewed and changed at moderator discretion.Maybe things would be easier if everyone could put gray area things there and mods could save time and energy by pushing any gray area post to there?
So, my question is whether or not mods have have discussed subforum rules modification or plan to in near future?

I would add to that that the mods also need to live by their own rules. Too many times, although certainly not all times, some mods have forced their own opinions on everyone else by deeming that opinions or posts contrary to their views are political in nature. I repeat what I said before that it is virtually impossible to discuss most medical topics without becoming political, because there is no consensus in a lot of scientific claims, but even if there were a consensus, science is not determined by consensus. If science were determined by consensus, then the world would still be considered flat and the center of the universe. Remember there was a consensus of "scientists" who opposed Galileo and declared he was a heretic deserving execution. It is claimed that there is a consensus today on climate change, and yet there are still plenty of legitimate scientists who take issue with some of those consensus claims (Dr Judith Curry anyone?), and yet those consensus scientist rule the roost. Climate change is obviously not medical in nature, but the point is the same. In almost all areas of science, including medicine, opposition to consensus THEORIES is considered heresy and conspiracy theory. As alums (most of us) of a scientific institution, one would think we would support the true science of discussion, deliberation, and debate, and yet sadly, there are some who simply will not allow that to happen, therefore saying that the consensus view is a "my way or the highway" determining factor, and that any discussion or opposition to that view is a conspiracy theory. SAD !!!

 

[4shotB]

As I'm sure you know, not everyone is allowed to participate in that political subforum, partly because there was a time period when moderation in that subforum was agenda driven rather than rules based. My recollection from that time period is that one of the mods said that in the future those subforum rules could reviewed and changed at moderator discretion.Maybe things would be easier if everyone could put gray area things there and mods could save time and energy by pushing any gray area post to there?
So, my question is whether or not mods have have discussed subforum rules modification or plan to in near future?

Fair questions and I will answer to the best of my ability. There are conversations about rules and modding that are ongoing. I think we mutually align for the most part but, as has been pointed out, when you allow some gray area there is always room for differences in individual interpretation and thus disputes/disagreements/perceptions of bias/etc. This is what happens frequently on this site. Other GT forums of which you may or may not be aware take away this friction by either banning politics in its entirety or by letting almost anything and everything go.

I moved to this site years ago as this is the format that I prefer but the other boards also have their strong proponents as well and I have never got the suspicion that the "founding fathers" here see the other boards as rivals or threats to their business model. Nor do they appear to be overly concerned if people find a "better fit" for them at these other sites from what I can tell.

Actually, I never venture much into the Political Forums area as it is not a topic that I look to an internet message forum to for information. Too much noise and opinion-based material to sift through. And we rarely get member reports from that forum so I suppose that is not moderated much at all but again this is merely my opinion based on gut feel and I could be entirely wrong. Interestingly enough, when I looked in there a thread for COVID already exists where people can in fact bring into play the evils of the other party which offends them the most.

I am not sure who is or is not allowed to look/post there although I could find out if it really mattered to me but I will say this in defense of my peers on staff here...I find that they are fairly patient for the most part and most of the times seek second opinions before doing anything as serious as banning. Imo, if they err, it is on the side of leniency. If they took action I would imagine that it was warranted. Again, you or others may disgree with any or all of the above and that I am fine with.

Regards.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Fair questions and I will answer to the best of my ability. There are conversations about rules and modding that are ongoing. I think we mutually align for the most part but, as has been pointed out, when you allow some gray area there is always room for differences in individual interpretation and thus disputes/disagreements/perceptions of bias/etc. This is what happens frequently on this site. Other GT forums of which you may or may not be aware take away this friction by either banning politics in its entirety or by letting almost anything and everything go.

I moved to this site years ago as this is the format that I prefer but the other boards also have their strong proponents as well and I have never got the suspicion that the "founding fathers" here see the other boards as rivals or threats to their business model. Nor do they appear to be overly concerned if people find a "better fit" for them at these other sites from what I can tell.

Actually, I never venture much into the Political Forums area as it is not a topic that I look to an internet message forum to for information. Too much noise and opinion-based material to sift through. And we rarely get member reports from that forum so I suppose that is not moderated much at all but again this is merely my opinion based on gut feel and I could be entirely wrong. Interestingly enough, when I looked in there a thread for COVID already exists where people can in fact bring into play the evils of the other party which offends them the most.

I am not sure who is or is not allowed to look/post there although I could find out if it really mattered to me but I will say this in defense of my peers on staff here...I find that they are fairly patient for the most part and most of the times seek second opinions before doing anything as serious as banning. Imo, if they err, it is on the side of leniency. If they took action I would imagine that it was warranted. Again, you or others may disgree with any or all of the above and that I am fine with.

Regards.

I think there is very little moderation in the political threads NOW because everyone who disagreed with somebody got banned. I am one of those.

 

[4shotB]

I think there is very little moderation in the political threads NOW because everyone who disagreed with somebody got banned. I am one of those.

I just looked in there SS, which as I said is rare. Three observations...1)the mix is split between left and right as far as I can tell (just sampled the first 4 posts to be transparent) 2) there is nothing in there that isn't readily available elsewhere so I don't think you are missing anything of import and 3) looks like only a handful of people even go in there. I wouldn't suspect that there were that many "mod causalities" to whittle it down to 6-8 posters.

ETA: sampled first four threads, not first 4 posts!

 

[Northeast Stinger]

It is very possible to discuss medicine without discussing politics. Discuss medicine. Do not discuss personalities around medicine. Do not discuss conspiracy type theories. Do not post links to partisan (left or right) blog sites. Do not post links to Twitter posts that have definitive statements derived from unverified studies.

Basically, discuss infection rates, hospitalization rates, etc. (all of which are dropping dramatically). Discuss vaccination rates. Discuss concerns about the vaccines, if you are concerned about them.

It is even possible to discuss the need or lack of need for any restrictions without really getting into "politics". Just keep the discussion to restrictions and the reasons they are needed or not needed.

I think you believe it is impossible because you are inundated with political talk about the disease. If you (in general not you specifically) don't listen to or pay attention to conservative or liberal talk radio, psuedo-news programs, Twitter feeds, Facebook groups, etc. , then there are a lot of facts that can be discussed without getting into a mic-drop attempt shouting match with the rival tribe over something somewhat, maybe, sort of related to COVID-19. Try to step away from psuedo-news, or Facebook groups or wherever you are getting your news for a couple of weeks, and you will probably find that things don't get you as excitable as they do now.

Thank you!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Generally speaking I would be okay with those topics as long as the post is science based and not opinion based. But before I posted anything, I would ask myself if the post, info, link, etc. that I am about to share is scientific in nature or political in nature. Could others perceive it as political.? If I wasn't sure I would refrain from posting.

Again, the next post that crosses that threshold will be the last Covid post on this site. I don't know how to communicate that any more clearly. I will be happy to assist others in finding other internet forums more suited for this topic.

The problem is quoting a source like 911 Breaking News. They have had to repeatedly remove their own posts because they’ve been caught lying and falsifying data to push a political agenda.

IT IS POSSIBLE to discuss complicated and even potentially controversial issues without wholesale character assassination, spinning the facts to support a conclusion you’ve already arrived at, or believing in conspiracy theories.

 

[Buzzbomb]

Hope this won’t be considered political since Dr. Fauci has been at the side of the previous President(who stopped his golf game once, to take his call)& the current President, as his current Chief Medical Advisor….I wish those personal attacks on the Doctor would stop. Please?

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

The problem is quoting a source like 911 Breaking News. They have had to repeatedly remove their own posts because they’ve been caught lying and falsifying data to push a political agenda.

IT IS POSSIBLE to discuss complicated and even potentially controversial issues without wholesale character assassination, spinning the facts to support a conclusion you’ve already arrived at, or believing in conspiracy theories.

Not every dissenting opinion is a "conspiracy theory", although that seems to be one of the buzz words used in this country today to describe views contrary to some kind of "consensus". For instance certain claims are said to have been debunked, when absolutely no sources of this so-called debunking are ever offered. And this goes with medicine too.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Hope this won’t be considered political since Dr. Fauci has been at the side of the previous President(who stopped his golf game once, to take his call)& the current President, as his current Chief Medical Advisor….I wish those personal attacks on the Doctor would stop. Please?

Since there is adequate evidence that a problem exists, then opposing any discussion of those claims is obviously political, and more so than the claims themselves

 

[armeck]

I think there is very little moderation in the political threads NOW because everyone who disagreed with somebody got banned. I am one of those.

How can you know that considering you can't see the subforum? The Political section is pretty banal at this point, which to me says that the ones who were causing the most strife were the ones removed.

 

[armeck]

I can play this game all day?

So, peer reviewed is no longer a good indicator of trustworthiness? You're just tossing that to the side now?