Hmmm... I disagree.
So when something becomes more actual/hot topic leading to more discussion we are going to allow less freedom? Sounds quite oppressive to me.
And 'that stuff just happens' is a horrible excuse.
Well, the thing is, when something becomes a hot topic, especially if it is something controversial, in the heat of the moment strong reactions are going to be had and it will take less to cause discussion to descend into fighting and arguments. Mods also are going to inevitably have a higher workload, especially when the controversial topic touches on subjects that the forum has stricter rules pertaining to. It was the same when it came to Clinic implications too, but then at least discussion could just be moved or redirected rather than quashed entirely.
However, it is not unreasonable to expect tighter moderation around controversial subjects when emotions are running high, because in addition to it simply being easier for mods to remove an entire line of discussion than to filter through each one to see which ones break rules and which don't and ascertain which will still make sense when orphaned from the other parts of the discussion and which won't, there's also simply the fact that when emotions are riding high, a post which might not fall foul of the rules might be seen as inciting discussion outside of the rules, and also because other people's emotions are also riding high, the likelihood of a discussion degenerating into anger, insults and arguments is higher too.
I accept it's mighty difficult to touch on a subject like the protests at the Vuelta without venturing into politics, and some posts that I made got deleted that I was a bit annoyed by, because I thought they toed the line and used less inflammatory metaphors and comparisons that I felt enabled me to explain reasoning behind the existence of the protests without delving into the rights or wrongs of their causes, but I was nevertheless not
surprised by it happening. I understand the reasons behind there being a politics ban but I think it's not really possible to fully blanket ban something as general and all-encompassing as politics, because there will almost
always be some way shape or form by which politics impacts the sport, be it the countries or regions hosting races and their economies or party politics; the soft power and sportswashing of various teams and races, or just which riders we choose to like or dislike can be impacted by the opinions they choose to share or espouse. To take a less divisive example, I think it's not great to have to speak in riddles and hints if somebody asks why there's a section of the fanbase that dislikes José Joaquín Rojas, because that is more to do with
historical politics, but I understand why raising a discussion on the politics of, say, Chloe Dygert or Quinn Simmons, who have both nailed their political colours very firmly to the mast, is undesirable for the wellbeing of the forum.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram