Hi @Process1, I disagree with that approach.The reason for this...

Hi @Process1, I disagree with that approach.

The reason for this is that if well meaning and rationally thinking people do that then people like R22 post stuff that is just plainly untrue and mischievous. This then allows the publishing of a particular narrative that is not debated and debunked where necessary.

Additionally, although I may disagree with a particular point of view, that does not mean that that view should just be silenced. We walk a very dark path should we silence an individual's right to speak their mind.

My approach has been, and will continue to be, to counter obvious false and misleading claims with rational, well thought out counter arguments (I hope). People may not like what I have to say, and I'm okay with that. It's the conversation that matters to me.

Finally, should the "conversation" get to a point whereby it is blatantly misleading then there is always recourse to go the HotCopper moderators and have them adjudicate the matter and put the individual in question on notice and possibly ban them. For the most serious of breaches, there is the possibility of a legal remedy, but that action would have to be undertaken by the aggrieved party. I assume that such an action would be a civil matter.

Anyway don't stress. These individuals are quickly identified and usually disappear (for a period) once they are challenged.

BTW, there are a number of contributors to the LTR conversation that people strongly disagree with but with whom I don't necessarily disagree with. Maybe their motives at times and also maybe the way they approach their topic of interest. But these individuals have good points to make at times and therefore their conversation is, in my mind, a valid conversation. It is therefore up to me to understand and either accept or reject what they have to say.

Have a great evening.