Random Dude wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2025 10:23 am ....

I actually agree with you on everything said, both in practice and in theory. That's basically why I call it a "compromise." The reason I don't think it's that big of a deal, is this would ONLY be because the forum software we use doesn't have a perfect solution, like completely "ignoring" a member you had no interest in interacting with, like all mainstream social media platforms that I know of, for better or worse.

Maybe even a better compromise would be to leave things exactly as-is and if someone REALLY wants to be active on here but also just can't fucking stand dicey hot topics like Trump, they can go opt-out. The way I am thinking it could be set up is if you could go to asub-forum section (like the Darknet News section) and instead of requesting access, you'd simply "join" and the moment you do, any topic that's in the new section would be invisible for you and only you, until you "left" the group. I've never seen it done like that on a forum, but seems it would work as described. You mentioning Israel/Palestine. That was a good example of a topic that always gets heated (just like it did on here recently), and it would have been great to have been able to just split it off to another sub-forum where all those who wanted to continue seeing it could, and those who didn't wouldn't. And again, I agree with you and others who say outright "don't open it if you don't want to read it," but it does seem that some might like to have that option for just the most triggering of topics, lol. In a way the whole thing like someone saying they don't like P*rnHub because it has so much gay porn on there and someone else pointing out to them that they don't actually have to watch it just because it's on there and should probably just watch what they like and ignore the rest, lol.

so what's the solution

OP posts a question - asking for a solution without mentioning a problem.

That's a problem.

USA politics dominates discussions all over the world and at times, much more than others. And these are the times.

I really enjoy reading the political discussions on an international expats forum where you can get the vibe of so many people of diverse nationalities.

I think most complainers on here love to hate stuff - just because. But if it bothers them enough - they dont have to be here at all. And you would lose a lot less people if you do nothing, than if you over control for everything because then it will just be a watered down highly controlled lame milque·toast experience.

I’m not interested in it, but it doesn’t bother me eityer if folks want to hammer it out. As an adult you can choose to just ignore surely…

David Gordon wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2025 7:00 pm

so what's the solution

OP posts a question - asking for a solution without mentioning a problem.

That's a problem.

USA politics dominates discussions all over the world and at times, much more than others. And these are the times.

I really enjoy reading the political discussions on an international expats forum where you can get the vibe of so many people of diverse nationalities.

I think most complainers on here love to hate stuff - just because. But if it bothers them enough - they dont have to be here at all. And you would lose a lot less people if you do nothing, than if you over control for everything because then it will just be a watered down highly controlled lame milque·toast experience.

David, you know very well what the problem was.
[Readers please note that the OP in this thread was originally part of the thread mentioned below as "My original post".]

My original post was with regards a personal attack against a member by another member whose main interest appears to be nothing but international politics. The trolling member joined the forum only 3 months ago and now has an impressive posting history on political threads.

The problem is that over the years we get new members who have zero affiliation with Cambodia, have never been to Cambodia, and probably couldn't find Cambodia on a world map, join CEO just to troll on political threads. Take the time to pull up some of those threads from yesteryear and you will see the same names posting, but no history of posts related to Cambodia.

THAT WAS THE PROBLEM I WAS REFERRING TO.

When I posted the second post, which you have partly quoted, the post was partly tongue-in-cheek to make the point that if discussion of US politics was to be banned or hidden, then the potential new members who are looking for new political trolling grounds might be detered.
I was surprised by the comments of support in the Karma/Thumbs up. There was only one negative comment.

What disappointed me most in all of this was the way in which the focus of my original post was totally lost in favor of a discussion about potential forum censorship. In the end, we still have a member of 10 year standing being trolled by a new member with slurs like 'homosexual pedophile'.
Or is name calling and personal attacks ok now?

Username Taken wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2025 4:51 am

David Gordon wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2025 7:00 pm

so what's the solution

OP posts a question - asking for a solution without mentioning a problem.

That's a problem.

USA politics dominates discussions all over the world and at times, much more than others. And these are the times.

I really enjoy reading the political discussions on an international expats forum where you can get the vibe of so many people of diverse nationalities.

I think most complainers on here love to hate stuff - just because. But if it bothers them enough - they dont have to be here at all. And you would lose a lot less people if you do nothing, than if you over control for everything because then it will just be a watered down highly controlled lame milque·toast experience.

David, you know very well what the problem was.
[Readers please note that the OP in this thread was originally part of the thread mentioned below as "My original post".]

My original post was with regards a personal attack against a member by another member whose main interest appears to be nothing but international politics. The trolling member joined the forum only 3 months ago and now has an impressive posting history on political threads.

The problem is that over the years we get new members who have zero affiliation with Cambodia, have never been to Cambodia, and probably couldn't find Cambodia on a world map, join CEO just to troll on political threads. Take the time to pull up some of those threads from yesteryear and you will see the same names posting, but no history of posts related to Cambodia.

THAT WAS THE PROBLEM I WAS REFERRING TO.

When I posted the second post, which you have partly quoted, the post was partly tongue-in-cheek to make the point that if discussion of US politics was to be banned or hidden, then the potential new members who are looking for new political trolling grounds might be detered.
I was surprised by the comments of support in the Karma/Thumbs up. There was only one negative comment.

What disappointed me most in all of this was the way in which the focus of my original post was totally lost in favor of a discussion about potential forum censorship. In the end, we still have a member of 10 year standing being trolled by a new member with slurs like 'homosexual pedophile'.
Or is name calling and personal attacks ok now?

The solution is to ban the obvious trolls.