Political comments on the Binoculars and Spotting Scopes forum (2 Viewers)

[Hermann]

I don't like the political statements made here by some posters lately. Such comments seem me to have become more frequent in recent months, and I think they endanger the open and frank discussion of binoculars and spotting scopes. This is Birdforum, not some political forum, and political statements in any shape or form are offtopic. Period. If you want to write about your political convictions, go to Ruffled Feathers or to a forum where such statements are welcome.

I do wish the moderators would step in and put an end to this now. If they don't, this forum will go up in flames as soon as people with different political persuasions step in to state their views. And they surely will if this doesn't stop. It's just a matter of time.

Also note that this is an international forum, and there are people from many different countries and cultures here who may have very different views of the world. Putting forward political agendas that are pertinent to just one country seems me to be quite offensive.

Hermann

 

[Canip]

I support that.
It‘s not so much that posters start a conversation such as „what is the problem with vaccinations?“ - in such a case I could just ignore the thread and let those discuss who like to -, but it‘s mostly the „by the way“ kind of comments in an otherwise innocent thread that are less than useful because the subject matter of the theead will then often immediately be lost*.
So far, the moderators have done a fairly good job in keeping the forum clean. So let it stay that way.

*guilty myself

 

[Mono]

If you see anything of concern then use the report system. Don't respond or get into arguments.

 

[Maljunulo]

I agree, it's time to reach for the button.

 

[GrampaTom]

I don't like the political statements made here by some posters lately. Such comments seem me to have become more frequent in recent months, and I think they endanger the open and frank discussion of binoculars and spotting scopes. This is Birdforum, not some political forum, and political statements in any shape or form are offtopic. Period. If you want to write about your political convictions, go to Ruffled Feathers or to a forum where such statements are welcome.

I do wish the moderators would step in and put an end to this now. If they don't, this forum will go up in flames as soon as people with different political persuasions step in to state their views. And they surely will if this doesn't stop. It's just a matter of time.

Also note that this is an international forum, and there are people from many different countries and cultures here who may have very different views of the world. Putting forward political agendas that are pertinent to just one country seems me to be quite offensive.

Hermann

I agree. I fear we disrespect Troubador who as we know is struggling and no doubt has limited energy to ride herd on this.

 

[dries1]

Let's keep it to Leica VS. Zeiss, Swarovski VS. Leica, Zeiss VS. Swarovski, Nikon VS. Swarovski, Leica VS. Nikon, Zeiss VS. Nikon, Porro VS. Roof, and on and on, etc.

 

[Scott98]

If I'm guilty of it....sorry! Absolutely "don't feed the troll" is the best response. Modern "politics" is designed to fit peoples' need for attention IMO....just deny the attention and the troll usually goes away

 

[Maljunulo]

That doesn’t always seem to work too well here.

 

[Patudo]

Fortunately, the individuals that are keenest to offer their "insight" into politics here can also for the most part be safely ignored when it comes to optics...

 

[fazalmajid]

Let's keep it to Leica VS. Zeiss, Swarovski VS. Leica, Zeiss VS. Swarovski, Nikon VS. Swarovski, Leica VS. Nikon, Zeiss VS. Nikon, Porro VS. Roof, and on and on, etc.

Religion, not politics. Got it 😇

 

[Ignatius]

Maybe that would also put an end to those idiotic comments by some about "Chyna" (sic). Products made in China are not per se bad quality. Everything depends on the QC. And that CEOs are cheered on by their shareholders for increasing profit margins by exporting jobs is not new, but sadly not understood by those always rotely slagging off said country.

 

[Mono]

Can we not turn a thread about political arguments in optics discussions into a political argument!

 

[albie...]

Can we not turn a thread about political arguments in optics discussions into a political argument!

You must have known it was going to happen . A thread like this one is basically an invite for said offenders .

 

[Maljunulo]

Let's keep it to Leica VS. Zeiss, Swarovski VS. Leica, Zeiss VS. Swarovski, Nikon VS. Swarovski, Leica VS. Nikon, Zeiss VS. Nikon, Porro VS. Roof, and on and on, etc.

That will never work.

It leaves no room to discuss glare.

 

[Cest]

What you left out Maven in that list? What are you? A communist?

 

[tenex]

I hate to trouble this fine consensus, but I can't think of a single instance of political remarks leading to mayhem here that "endangered" anything, primarily because their authors (being after all regular posters of more relevant material) aren't actually trying to disrupt the forum -- surely that's clear -- so one shouldn't call them "trolls", and others already wisely let those remarks pass for the most part so I see no pressing need for censorship to avoid toxic "political arguments" that are hardly occurring. There are a few members whose ideas or communication style I dislike myself for various reasons, but censorship is a tricky business, and you would need a better rationale to justify it.

 

[Lewis]

Aye, political Tracts and Communist Manfrottos…

 

[Maljunulo]

......... but censorship is a tricky business, and you would need a better rationale to justify it.

Hear, hear!

To allow only “correct” opinions to be expressed is anathema to any thinking individual, especially if it is done to “keep people from being confused.”

 

[Tringa45]

I hate to trouble this fine consensus, but I can't think of a single instance of political remarks leading to mayhem here that "endangered" anything, primarily because their authors (being after all regular posters of more relevant material) aren't actually trying to disrupt the forum -- surely that's clear -- so one shouldn't call them "trolls", and others already wisely let those remarks pass for the most part so I see no pressing need for censorship to avoid toxic "political arguments" that are hardly occurring. There are a few members whose ideas or communication style I dislike myself for various reasons, but censorship is a tricky business, and you would need a better rationale to justify it.

Censorship already exists on the forum. Posts get deleted and threads locked.

However, I think Hermann's concern is one of relevance. There are a very few members here who do not miss an opportunity to grind their political axe, and their "politics" are so misinformed or self-contradictory that they are a provocation. For obvious reasons I will refrain from giving examples.

I read a quote by Willy Brandt today: "Put it behind you, don't even ignore it!"
That advice, though is too much to expect of most of us, least of all me!

John

 

[limonabe]

. . . censorship is a tricky business, and you would need a better rationale to justify it.

"Don't talk politics in the binocular forum" is a straightforward enough principle, no?

Is there a really any better rationale than "stay on topic or don't post here"?