On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 12:39 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Can we keep this a short discussion?Thanks Mark.
For the record:
1. I didn't intend to post this request in an inappropriate board. I'm not a power user like J and others here, and I don't know elsewhere to post such a request.
2. I also didn't start a popularity poll -- merely a request to Mark for him and only him to consider.
3. But on the other hand, I'm more than happy to discuss it with my reasoning. That's "discuss" -- not simply counter "me too," "me three" knee-jerk replies -- they are meaningless, as Mark already heard what I already said that he already knew -- it's HIS baby.
4. No, no one hijacked a Y! group and dragged it to io by the hair. But on the other hand, no one advertises that "Be aware that, if you come to IO, the platform discriminates in favor of the (insert left/right/up/down -- anything you want to) political faction, rather than encouraging a full and open multi-political discussion." Now, that would be complete disclosure and transparency.
5. The policy can cause difficulties for group owners. Yes, the knee-jerks will say, "Well it's my group (just like "it's Mark's baby"} so go pound....whatever." But that's just another typical knee-jerk reply w/o carefully considering the implications of the difficulty and position that any discriminatory policy could unwittingly place certain groups/owners into. e.g., What if Indivisible joined io (maybe it has, I dunno?), and members discovered afterward that Mark discriminated in favor of MAGA supporters??? A horse of a different color, 'eh? What hell could (or SHOULD) the group owner receive?
6. It's just not a good thing, for everyone involved, to be associated with discriminatory policies, whether they are in favor of your camp or against your camp.
7. I learned something as a kid (60 years ago) that "Just because you can do something, doesn't necessarily make it a good idea." The corollary to "Just because it's not illegal, doesn't necessarily. make it a good idea to do."