Will this forum remain Politics-free?

[Maxmars]

And we're ready to taxi for take-off!...

We'll be forging ahead with those Fighters who might be interested in the "DI Political Discourse Debate"... 
Except right now, there are only two Fighters... recovering from their last match.

I wonder who is willing to become a Fighter, and embark on this journey?

[DBCowboy]

Moi

[LogicalGraffiti]

Just got post banned from ATS.

Uh oh!  I'll have to go find the post that got you banned.  I hope I get a laugh from it.  I'd give it a star too but I don't think that works for banned accounts.

[DBCowboy]

Uh oh!  I'll have to go find the post that got you banned.  I hope I get a laugh from it.  I'd give it a star too but I don't think that works for banned accounts.

Just post banned, but it was over . . . . . friggin' politics, actually the flag.

[putnam6]

Just post banned, but it was over . . . . . friggin' politics, actually the flag.

Was it the no American flag in the National Park in Alaska?

All the while we have Hamas ISIS and Palestinian flags to varying degrees on our campuses.

[Creaky]

I propose that the only place for political topics to be discussed effectively is in an environment where there is a tradition of conduct and an built-in exclusion of trolling... the Debate forum sounds a perfect fit to my thinking.

Only the active participants can contribute to the discussion (no "piling on,") there is no room (or need) for garbage input (which is pointless anyway,) and the prevailing "tradition" is to discuss the topic (NOT each other) which constrains the "free-for-all" hazard... this might avoid making it about 'feelings,' 'aspersions,' and other media/activism antics.

But this is just an opinion I have...  Would anyone be game to try it out, I wonder?  

Just sayin... certainly there are enough bold members who could.

Adults doing adult things?
if it’s to murky or dirty, don’t participate (not being personal?),
cant regulate emotions and it’s an emotional discussion

Politics is news and I use to go to ats to get my news, it’s not here though and to DIs detriment

politics and religion (though we are not talking religion) are a never ending spring of crime corruption and abuse, it needs to be discussed. 
Imagine another Jan 6 and DI doesn’t discuss politics, absurd?
How it’s regulated is the question I believe

[Maxmars]

Adults doing adult things?
if it’s to murky or dirty, don’t participate (not being personal?),
cant regulate emotions and it’s an emotional discussion

Politics is news and I use to go to ats to get my news, it’s not here though and to DIs detriment

politics and religion (though we are not talking religion) are a never ending spring of crime corruption and abuse, it needs to be discussed. 
Imagine another Jan 6 and DI doesn’t discuss politics, absurd?
How it’s regulated is the question I believe

Yeah, the emotionalism of others can't be regulated.  But conduct can often be a valid measure of actual intent.

I get it, politics is interwoven in almost anything 'discussed' in a social media context.  And some things are predominantly political... thus the media sees to it that it is reduced to political theater.  Hence, no resolution, no commonality between arguers. It isn't all that fun... but it can be made to drag on forever.  You're correct that religion also features this kind of thing... although I would say it is common to all institutions in "power," (or at least, I can't think of any exceptions.)

In the final analysis, effective debate relies on "self-regulation."  A discipline that many of ATS's old Mud-Pit dwellers felt "entitled" to refuse.  If you were to debate someone here about a point of political disagreement, at what point would you resort to caustic jabs and mean-spirited prods of an antagonistic emotional nature (also meant rhetorically, not personal)? 

The rub is that if the point is the politics, it's not about how angry it makes you, or how you might characterize others.  But many have been 'conditioned' to think that making someone else appear foolish has some 'value' to resolve the actual politics.  For some people, politics is a cosplay thing... all theater, all appearances.

Anyway, DI is willing to entertain debate of all sorts, but that means discussion,... dialogue,... and not so much the theater of "self." (Otherwise we would just be cosplaying celebrity lawyers on TV.)

I think as our membership grows, you will begin to see more "news" brought here for discussion... for now, we work with what members bring.  News aggregation was a byproduct of the ATS communities' insatiable curiosity... until some time ago, when something "else" happened.  What exactly?  I can't describe it to my satisfaction.

[Kenzo]

You'll have to pay me for having an argument chatter with me, it`s 5 pounds to 5 minuts . 8 pounds to 10 minuts

[Waterglass]

Curious if y'all have a plan regarding political discussions for this site.

Some love it.  Some hate it. 

or...maybe it's buried somewhere and I simply missed it.  

A fear of mine is that the "other" site will truly disappear and DI will see an influx of new members who bring their poison with them

The Q Thread is here along with the Orange man marching band.

[theshadowknows]

The Q Thread is here along with the Orange man marching band.

I allowed it to give people a sense of continuity with ATS seemingly going belly up, but I admit it's a contradiction to my entire point. Though I'd argue that the political spectrum here is more diverse than ATS at the moment, and I think that's a good thing. Differing minds and opinions are what inspires insight. Always feel free to use this platform to try and change someone's mind for the better. As long as we all do that through kindness, I think we'll be on the right track.