A moderator can talk politics in a thread about transgender athletes.
This is what bothers me about shutting down politics threads. Almost any issue can involve politics. The current Clinic discussion about Freeman and Sky/Ineos certainly involves politics. It's difficult to have a . comprehensive discussion about doping without referring to politics. Maybe we need a Politics of Cycling thread?
where there are fewer on-going moderation issues than many TDF /Clinic threads
Some of the Clinic threads have made the politics threads look tame, that's for sure. LOL, people trying to promote political conspiracy theories could learn some lessons from the Clinic. But again, careful what you wish for. At this point, i worry that the Clinic may be shut down, too. Many cycling and other sports forums don't allow talk about doping, other than maybe announcements that some athlete has tested positive.
Having high engagement in an area of the site where people are constantly fighting and attacking one another, on a topic irrelevant to cycling, can easily be seen as detrimental to the brand of this site as a hub of cycling interest and passion.
I get that, but then why have any non-cycling threads? Why have a music thread, e.g.? Does that contribute to the passion of cycling? Would there be fewer people coming to CN and discussing cycling if there were no music thread? I seriously doubt it.
Other sports forums I've seen don't allow any discussion of any topics not directly related to the sport that the forum is designed to promote. If CN is going to allow non-cycling threads, they need to explain specifically what is and isn't allowed, and why. As I and others have pointed out, heated controversies are not a valid reason, since many currently allowed threads exhibit them.
At this point, i have no idea what is and isn't allowed here any more. Could we have a discussion of climate change? That obviously involves politics, and just as obviously engenders a lot of controversy among certain posters, but it's also a scientific issue, and involves lifestyle and so many other things. Genetically engineered crops? Religion? Travel to certain countries? Where do you draw the line?
I have never understood censorship in this way.
I wouldn't call shutting down the politics threads censorship. A privately owned site has a right to determine what is and what isn't discussed. As I pointed out, many forums allow discussion only of a tightly defined topic, and they certainly have a right to do that without being accused of censorship.
i just think CN needs to be consistent and transparent about where they draw the line, and explain exactly why allowing or not allowing discussion of certain topics promotes their vision. If they want to get rid of every topic that isn't directly related to cycling, I don't have a problem with that. I'll miss the old forum, but will understand. But when they start picking and choosing, i want to know why.