Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
I never said we had to have the same solution. You probably have a different solution from me on at least three subjects, so go for it. The idea is to make this place less hostilely adversarial. The best way I can think to do that is to keep your eyes on the prize, even if it's not everyone looking at one prize.
|
But will, what Ustwo is saying--and I agree with him--is that he and I are NEVER going to see eye to eye on even the EXISTENCE of certain problems. We fundamentally can't have a "solution-centric discussion" when one of us is of the opinion that it's not a problem, unless that person is explicitly stifled out of the conversation and sidelined from all talk about it, and I can't really stand for that.
So... While I'm all for raising the bar on civility and mutual understanding (and I'll cop with some chagrin to having set that bar pretty darn low, myself), AND I'm interested in solutions to (what I see as) world problems, I'm not sure how you'd effectively have our discussions here be reliably in that mold. I agree with DC that adding a new layer of structure for every thread to fit inside of just seems stifling and unnecessary. And geez, what happens when a newbie comes along? We have a hard enough time even getting them up to the crummy standard of discourse we're already at!
Upshot: I like where you're looking, but I don't think we've settled on a workable way to get there.
EDIT (I really should have noticed the second page of this thread before posting...): I'm game to try this, as laid out in the last handful of posts. As long as it doesn't become the official Way Tilted Politics is Run, I'm definitely up for it an experiment.