Clarification on Constructiveness of Posts

[dawei]

There is a thread created by Sean with some explanation on what kind of posting is expected or not:

 

https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/27237-moderation-transparency-2013/

 

 

Quote

2. disrespectful vs forbidden content.

 we're making a distinction between disrespectful vs forbidden content, and our approach to each.

 in a nutshell, forbidden content may (and most likely will) be deleted, whereas disrespectful content may be moved (e.g., to the pit), but will not be deleted.

 forbidden content includes: spam, malware, piracy, pornography, child exploitation, privacy violations, safety threats, and grossly offensive content.

disrespectful content includes anything less than respectful, nonviolent language toward another member, group, gender, ethnicity, nationality, religion, and sexual orientation.

(acceptable, respectful content is discussing our views and disagreeing passionately while considering how to communicate intelligently and free from aggression.)

 

 

The rules are pretty clear as to posts directed towards members or outside groups but not to just any individual out there. 

 

I reached out to Sean recently to ask how he would of handled constant venting and rants on an almost daily basis towards someone who may not even be a member.  

 

We agreed that such cases fall under a kind of personal spam and simply not constructive to the thread if actual members are affected by it; meaning, they felt they could not participate in discussion due to the rude or otherwise disrespectful expressions that occur on a non-stop basis.

 

This seems to fall more under disrespectful than forbidden but the staff will handle it on a case by case basis; somethings may be hidden or moved vs somethings may just be a warning. 

 

So, the focus of staff review of such posts is how it affects the member's ability to participate in discussion and whether it is constructive and adheres as well as possible to the ideals set forth in rules.   

 

But repeating, venting, spamming the same basic message over and over will not be acceptable.   Also, meaningless posts without regard to the topic may be hidden or moved as determined by the staff.  The staff will not attempt to monitor the entire board so we do rely on members to use the 'Report' feature when it seems warranted. 

 

TDB Staff

[liminal_luke]

3 hours ago, dawei said:

 

I reached out to Sean recently to ask how he would of handled constant venting and rants on an almost daily basis towards someone who may not even be a member.  

 

 

Apropo of this, I`ll repeat my opinion that when such ranty venting is directed towards a certain political figure in a thread devoted to the discussion of said political figure, I think it should be allowed to stand.  Is such ranting constructive?  No, it`s not.  But silencing a voice of dissent, particularly when that voice is in the minority in the discussion, feels heavy-handed.  People are allowed to say all sorts of nonsense here, as is clear to even the most casual observer of the forum.  Given the tradition of posting permissiveness here at the Bums, especially in the off-grid area, it makes sense to set the bar against moderation action very high indeed.

 

(As always, I appreciate your thoughtful approach to these issues, Dawei.  As a rank-and-file member, my opinion doesn`t have standing, but I offer it anyway.)

[dawei]

45 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

Apropo of this, I`ll repeat my opinion that when such ranty venting is directed towards a certain political figure in a thread devoted to the discussion of said political figure, I think it should be allowed to stand.  Is such ranting constructive?  No, it`s not.  But silencing a voice of dissent, particularly when that voice is in the minority in the discussion, feels heavy-handed.  People are allowed to say all sorts of nonsense here, as is clear to even the most casual observer of the forum.  Given the tradition of posting permissiveness here at the Bums, especially in the off-grid area, it makes sense to set the bar against moderation action very high indeed.

 

(As always, I appreciate your thoughtful approach to these issues, Dawei.  As a rank-and-file member, my opinion doesn`t have standing, but I offer it anyway.)

 

It is neither constructive nor serving any purpose for the thread and it puts off members.  On all three counts, Sean seemed to agree that should be treated as spam.   You can say something a few times (that is allowed to stand) but to repeat yourself daily x 5 x months on end and just change all the adjectives is robotic at best and senseless at worse.   The thread is meant to discuss policy stuff although personal stuff is not avoidable.   The problem is, the spam is all on the personal stuff.   So it is off-topic, spam.  There are lots of things to discuss but there is nothing to discuss regarding someone's hatred for another.  That is not the topic.  We're just back to TDB 101: Stay on topic 

 

[Geof Nanto]

3 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

As always, I appreciate your thoughtful approach to these issues, Dawei.  As a rank-and-file member, my opinion doesn`t have standing, but I offer it anyway.

 

Your opinion has a high standing with me, Liminal Luke. And I also have a high opinion of Dawei, and I greatly appreciate the effort all staff members put into moderating discussions here. However on this subject I suspect he and some other staff members are more than a little biased. I know there are staff members actively pro-Trump. Is their anyone on staff who is actively anti-Trump? 

 

(Ideally, I'd like it if all staff where without partisan political opinions, however I realise that's unrealistic.)

[Lost in Translation]

I just don't go there anymore. There's nothing left to learn there.

[Geof Nanto]

I would probably only have read the equivalent of a few pages of the Trump thread since it began, and nothing recently, so I’m in no position to gauge its mood. However when I have read it I found no informed discussion of American politics; rather the thread consisted of opposing camps battling it out. And I could understand the frustration of the anti-Trump camp in that theirs appeared to be the minority view.  Hence I can’t help but read Dawei’s comments as an attempt to shut down a minority point of view couched in noble sounding sentiments.  

 

Isn’t the whole point of “Off Topic” a place that allows people to vent? If there was genuine political discussion of the constructive type Dawei is now wanting, then we would have not needed to create “Off-Topic" in the first place.  

 

Edit for clarification: By “minority point of view” I’m referring only to discussion on this forum, not anti-Trump sentiment within an overall American or world setting.  

Edited December 6, 2018 by Yueya

[liminal_luke]

3 minutes ago, Yueya said:

 

 However on this subject I suspect he and some other staff members are more than a little biased. I know there are staff members actively pro-Trump. Is their anyone on staff who is actively anti-Trump? 

 

(Ideally, I'd like it if all staff where without partisan political opinions, however I realise that's unrealistic.)

 

Thanks, Yueya.  In my opinion, you`ve put your finger on the thorny issue at hand.  I wouldn`t want to suggest that the moderators would purposely go out of their way to silence an opinion they don`t agree with; in fact, I bet they are taking pains to avoid doing exactly that.  Still, we`re all human.  Interestingly, the posts in question that are disagreeable to many don`t bother me one whit.  Probably because I feel politically aligned with them.  Some of those who are politically out of synch with this poster may feel ruffled.  (At least I assume someone is ruffled or why have this discussion?)  Meanwhile, other posts that seem hateful to me -- and have been reported by me -- have been allowed to stand.  

 

If I was in charge of moderation, the poster in potential trouble would be someone else.  The moderation action would be different but no less safe from charges of bias.  That`s our reality, I guess.

 

Millions of people in the US and around the world are so alarmed about the state of current affairs they can hardly see straight, much less talk coherently about the issues.  When these people attempt to write, what comes out may look like unintelligible word-vomit to the more sanguine majority.  It may appear that the ravings of the alledged distressed madman are not constructive or on topic.  I disagree.  To me, these posts are a scream in the darkness. The posts may seem hateful, unhinged -- and indeed, perhaps they are.  Still, political opinion exists on a wide spectrum.  Lets call it YIn to Yang, since this is a Daoist forum.  To arbitrarily cut off any cross-section of that circle, even if it seems hateful or inarticulate or meaninglessly repetitive, would be lose lose our wholeness. 

[dawei]

3 hours ago, Yueya said:

 

Your opinion has a high standing with me, Liminal Luke. And I also have a high opinion of Dawei, and I greatly appreciate the effort all staff members put into moderating discussions here. However on this subject I suspect he and some other staff members are more than a little biased. I know there are staff members actively pro-Trump. Is their anyone on staff who is actively anti-Trump? 

 

(Ideally, I'd like it if all staff where without partisan political opinions, however I realise that's unrealistic.)

 

sorry, not so much pro-Trump as pro-policy.  But if this vitriolic manner of expression was done towards Obama, I would of shut it down sooner.   How's that for what does a staff person's policy position mean.   The problem is members quickly play a bias card.  If those who want to play such cards were on staff to deal with the reports regarding a single person causing enough work and discuss that required the owner's input, I think you'd have a different post

 

 

[dawei]

3 hours ago, Yueya said:

I would probably only have read the equivalent of a few pages of the Trump thread since it began, and nothing recently, so I’m in no position to gauge its mood. However when I have read it I found no informed discussion of American politics; rather the thread consisted of opposing camps battling it out. And I could understand the frustration of the anti-Trump camp in that theirs appeared to be the minority view.  Hence I can’t help but read Dawei’s comments as an attempt to shut down a minority point of view couched in noble sounding sentiments.  

 

Isn’t the whole point of “Off Topic” a place that allows people to vent? If there was genuine political discussion of the constructive type Dawei is now wanting, then we would have not needed to create “Off-Topic" in the first place.  

 

Edit for clarification: By “minority point of view” I’m referring only to discussion on this forum, not anti-Trump sentiment within an overall American or world setting.  

 

You've missed the entire point then... because the anti-Trump sentiment is not about policy at all but the person, so it is just personal.  The point of the clarification is to get back to policy discussions.   Hate has no place here is another way of speaking.  If you want to show you hatred of someone, go do something meaningful and shutdown the computer maybe.   

[dawei]

3 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

I wouldn`t want to suggest that the moderators would purposely go out of their way to silence an opinion they don`t agree with; in fact, I bet they are taking pains to avoid doing exactly that.  Still, we`re all human.  Interestingly, the posts in question that are disagreeable to many don`t bother me one whit.  Probably because I feel politically aligned with them.  Some of those who are politically out of synch with this poster may feel ruffled.  (At least I assume someone is ruffled or why have this discussion?) 

 

That is an individualistic point of view, not a staff one.  I am not personally bothered by the disagreeable, hate laced rants that require a daily fix, five times a day.  Some people's nature have different shades of a kind of addictive need to do something.  That's the way of human nature...  but if one views this from a staff point of view, the forum participation, civil exchange, respectful comments to engage in discussion is the ideal.   

 

We are not trying so much to make everyone happy but to make threads safe for people to participate.   If someone wants to show their hatred everyday x 5 in a thread, who can feel welcomed to join any discussion ?  

 

 

3 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

Meanwhile, other posts that seem hateful to me -- and have been reported by me -- have been allowed to stand.  

 

As I already said...  we allow some leeway for venting, to get it out... TO GET OVER IT...  Does a daily dose x 5 seem like that is leeway or abuse of our leeway ?

 

if some guy hits his head against a sign in frustration, you have some empathy that likely he is working through something and you give him the benefit of the doubt that this may actually be helpful for him to do so.   So you really accept the action.  But if you saw him go back everyday , 5 times, to hit he head on a sign, then you would worry something else... I assume you would as I think most humans would realize that is behavior which is not the norm. 

 

So, this clarification is both to help the person and the sign and all those that walk by it everyday to see this.    That is how staff needs to view things.  Not so much as moral police or a dictator but one that cares about all the angles and to try and create an environment of mutual exchange of ideas, however much we disagree.   

[Wu Ming Jen]

Do pro trump, tao bums actually admit that publicly?. It takes a lot of courage to embarrass oneself in public like that. Courage and not afraid of the obvious  judgement are two good qualities. The are a lot of actual politicians that could use some support as well.

 

PS Is sarcasm still permitted?

[Stosh]

39 minutes ago, Wu Ming Jen said:

 

 

PS Is sarcasm still permitted?

No, that kind of Dem behavior is verboten. 

[dawei]

45 minutes ago, Wu Ming Jen said:

Do pro trump, tao bums actually admit that publicly?. It takes a lot of courage to embarrass oneself in public like that. Courage and not afraid of the obvious  judgement are two good qualities. The are a lot of actual politicians that could use some support as well.

 

PS Is sarcasm still permitted?

 

If one is embarrassed by saying how they feel, the problem is much deeper than lack of courage.   

 

[Trunk]

On 12/5/2018 at 7:58 AM, dawei said:

There is a thread created by Sean with some explanation on what kind of posting is expected or not:

 

https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/27237-moderation-transparency-2013/

...

I reached out to Sean recently to ask how he would of handled constant venting and rants on an almost daily basis towards someone who may not even be a member.  

...

So, the focus of staff review of such posts is how it affects the member's ability to participate in discussion and whether it is constructive and adheres as well as possible to the ideals set forth in rules.  

 

This whole thing doesn't smell right.  Heavy handed, Orwellian.

 

Seems like the "ignore" feature is an easy built-in remedy.

 

(emphasis mine)

20 hours ago, dawei said:

The thread is meant to discuss policy stuff although personal stuff is not avoidable.   The problem is, the spam is all on the personal stuff.   So it is off-topic, spam.  There are lots of things to discuss but there is nothing to discuss regarding someone's hatred for another.  That is not the topic.  We're just back to TDB 101: Stay on topic 

 

That's simply not true.  Flatly not true.  If you look at the original post of "Talk Trump", there is no such posted intent of "policy only".  Go back and read the original posts.  "Policy only" is what you've said your interest is Dawei.  It's not built into the thread by original intent.  And the thread is named "Talk Trump", fer gosh sake, and it's in "Off Grid", lol.

 

- Trunk

 

Edited December 6, 2018 by Trunk

[dawei]

1 minute ago, Trunk said:

 

This whole thing doesn't smell right.  Heavy handed, Orwellian.

 

Seems like the "ignore" button is an easy built-in remedy.

 

(emphasis mine)

 

That's simply not true.  Flatly not true.  If you look at the original post of "Talk Trump", there is no such posted intent of "policy only".  Go back and read the original posts.  "Policy only" is what you've said your interest is Dawei.  It's not built into the thread by original intent.  And the thread is named "Talk Trump", fer gosh sake, and it's in "Off Grid", lol.

 

- Trunk

 

 

It was a split off topic.   One can talk Trump as has been said, there is some leeway for it... but to hijack a thread over ones inner hatred and daily fix to rant 5 times a day is not the intention of any thread on the entire board.   If this was going on anywhere else, there would be lots of reports... which there have been.  I didn't unilaterally make the decision all staff and owner weighed in.   

 

I'm not going to put staff through a continual review of reports.  We warned at least three times.  At least four members asked for civility.    One member's catharsis should find help somewhere; threads are not a substitute for that kind of help.   

[rideforever]

I've got a plan and it's as hot as my pants !!!

There is a saying that to tame a wild horse you give them a large pasture, so why not just create a new thread called "Trump : Wild And Naughty Rants" and just divert the river of spam into this basin !!!
Am I helping ?!!!

 

 

[dawei]

10 minutes ago, rideforever said:

I've got a plan and it's as hot as my pants !!!

There is a saying that to tame a wild horse you give them a large pasture, so why not just create a new thread called "Trump : Wild And Naughty Rants" and just divert the river of spam into this basin !!!
Am I helping ?!!!

 

Your suggesting staff should monitor 24x7 and move threads throughout the day and night...  that's not our job.   We decide on how to handle uncivility, disrespect, and violation of rules.   There is no amount of time and staff to deal with the idea you suggest.

 

Members are expected to be self-moderating and to a degree there is peer-moderation that occurs.  These are an essential part of a healthy forum.  When one takes the steps to call these out as biased suppression of expression, they have ceased to grasp what it means to participate in the health and welfare of a forum and it's members.    It takes a village comes to mind.  

[rideforever]

That's fine, but given the emotional levels on certain issues .... members themselves would be able to divert themselves into the basin; and the serious threads marked as such ... and members can be advised to put their hot views in the basin prepared for them.   This is in line with the Tao and practical.   Then everyone gets what they need.
For those unable to comply then your proposed actions would be understandable.

 

 

It's also about helping people with their disturbing minds, if they can vomit on a forum then they can get some room, and see what's inside them.   Many freaked out people in this society, so possibly that could be of service.

Who knows might even work.

 

Edited December 6, 2018 by rideforever

[dawei]

20 minutes ago, rideforever said:

That's fine, but given the emotional levels on certain issues .... members themselves would be able to divert themselves into the basin; and the serious threads marked as such ... and members can be advised to put their hot views in the basin prepared for them.   This is in line with the Tao and practical.   Then everyone gets what they need.
For those unable to comply then your proposed actions would be understandable.

 

There are at least two basins already:  Chaos and a PPD.   If we were to split stuff out (instead of hiding) to chaos, it means there is something of a discussion aspect within what is split out.    

 

What is there to have a discussion over when what we're talking about are samples (very small set of examples) like this:

 

Has trump ever sincerely admitted or apologized for his blatant lies, caught red handed hypocrisy, incitements to violence, acting as a twisted bully in chief, false accuser, business fraud per his bankruptcies, draft dodger in effect, tax manipulator and dodger in fact per his himself and family,  nepotism conveyor, woman abuser in words and deeds,  etc. etc. etc.  (the answer is NO, and never)  Good luck with such a piece of work...

 

Thanks be to trump for showing us what is near to the lowest level that human being can devolve to, for he generously gives us daily and hourly examples of lies, corruption of being, collusion, obstruction of justice, unethical and amoral behavior,  narcissistic megalomania, an ego freak, a cry baby, a blamer, denier, coward, cheat, slime ball, motor mouth, shallowness, a con man, scammer, thief, woman abuser, racist, dangerous and careless in words and deeds,  immature and insulting creep, unhinged, cheapo, tax dodger, draft dodger,  weak in reason and narrow minded,  a hater, a fake and flake,  nazi sympathizer, anti-democratic, pro dictator, weaver of grand excuses, mocker, hypnotizer,  anti-science, anti environment (that hurts all of us), a massive waster of resources and money, a bankrupt con man, nepotism, etc. etc. etc.

 

o need to go anywhere or check anything from various pro or con sources and talking heads, all one has to do is listen to and watch trump himself and see that he is an embodiment of lies, malice, misdirection, grandiose egotism, fraud, mockery, demeaning belittlement, sexual abuser and even predator,  a bankrupt con man who has conned his way since his dad bought and paid for his misadventures, a trickster,  a bully,  a being of zero conscience who gleefully causes harm and suffering to many, an inciter of violence, a neo-nazi sympathizer,   a pompous irresponsible jackass,  a dangerous erratic fool with way to much power and the list goes on and on with all this having been revealed by trump himself on stage or in meetings, via recorded video and audio.  (and sickly twisted tweets)  Anyone who finds comments on his well demonstrated and proven traits as being amusing or humorous is missing at least a few marbles besides a large part of their soul.

 

the utter hypocrisy and blatant absurdity of trump (being potus) is so shameful, dishonorable and disgusting that it is beyond measure, and those that support or excuse his words and actions  (some through trumps various forms of mind control and some who willingly go along ) are adding to his toxic national TV type of reality show of lies and narcissistic megalomania that is a grave danger to all,  this is as plain as day and can not be denied any further by any half way rational, decent and observant person!

 

you cut your own throat with your own razor and don't even know it yet, go to ER while you still can.

[rideforever]

Okay then, maybe you are right.   I actually don't know which members or forums you are talking about ... I take it it's Talk Trump thread, members unknown.

[Stosh]

1 minute ago, rideforever said:

Okay then, maybe you are right.   I actually don't know which members or forums you are talking about ... I take it it's Talk Trump thread, members unknown.

That's a pretty persuasive argument to me too , by itself there ,alright . 

[Trunk]

The very unusual situation that we are in is that 3bobs criticisms of djt's character and actions are actually accurate observations, not blind hatred. 

 

And djt's character, propensity to lie non-stop, coarseness, social manipulativeness, bullying, etc etc, actually has an impact & influence on policy, on domestic & foreign relations with various political leaders, with modeling behavior from a leader that has influence on the behavior of those led, on financial markets ... on all of the things that POTUS influences and/or directs.

 

Line up djt's actions next to any list of virtues from any 'good book' and, objectively, he is the vile antithesis of a virtuous human being.  We are in the situation where simply positing a description of the POTUS's action, just as-he-is, seems incredibly offensive.  That's because he just *is*.  That's what he actually *does*.  Even if you disagree with the assessment, it's a LEGITIMATELY COHERENT description of djt's actions as a human and as POTUS.

 

Tens of thousands of mental health professionals have taken the extraordinary step of speaking up to this territory.  It's a legit issue.

 

So, while 3bob's comments might seem offensive to some... to me, for instance, they just read as an unvarnished objective listing of what's happening.

 

In any case, all of this could be solved by the simple mention of, "the ignore feature exists, use it if you like".

Especially in "Off Grid", geez.

 

And, it's pretty clear that staff that post in "Talk Trump" are dedicatedly pro-Trump.  (Or at least carefully thoughtful and unbiased but somehow 99.999% of the time come to pro-Trump conclusions on both policy issues and all else.)

 

In the current context, all factors taken into account, the current action ... doesn't smell right. 

Comes across as Orwellian.

I don't buy it.

 

 

Edited December 6, 2018 by Trunk

[Wu Ming Jen]

I do not understand why a trump thread would causes so much chaos,,weird, did not see that coming. It seems A trump thread would attract a lot of balanced people to express their opinions. Sarcasm used until further notice from admin.

[dawei]

11 minutes ago, Trunk said:

The very unusual situation that we are in is that 3bobs criticisms of djt's character and actions are actually accurate observations, not blind hatred. 

 

And djt's character, propensity to lie non-stop, coarseness, social manipulativeness, bullying, etc etc, actually has an impact & influence on policy, on domestic & foreign relations with various political leaders, with modeling behavior from a leader that has influence on the behavior of those led, on financial markets ... on all of the things that POTUS influences and/or directs.

 

Line up djt's actions next to any list of virtues from any 'good book' and, objectively, he is the vile antithesis of a virtuous human being.  We are in the situation where simply positing a description of the POTUS's action, just as-he-is, seems incredibly offensive.  That's because he just *is*.  That's what he actually *does*.  Even if you disagree with the assessment, it's a LEGITIMATELY COHERENT description of djt's actions as a human and as POTUS.

 

Tens of thousands of mental health professionals have taken the extraordinary step of speaking up to this territory.  It's a legit issue.

 

So, while 3bob's comments might seem offensive to some... to me, for instance, they just read as an unvarnished objective listing of what's happening.

 

In any case, all of this could be solved by the simple mention of, "the ignore feature exists, use it if you like".

Especially in "Off Grid", geez.

 

And, it's pretty clear that staff that post in "Talk Trump" are dedicatedly pro-Trump.  (Or at least carefully thoughtful and unbiased but somehow 99.999% of the time come to pro-Trump conclusions on both policy issues and all else.)

 

In the current context, all factors taken into account, the current action ... doesn't smell right. 

Comes across as Orwellian.

I don't buy it.

 

Change the poster and the target. Same forum issues apply.   

 

His comments are not offensive to me.  And I'm not here to discuss virtues.. moralism is not my cup of soup.  The comments are lacking in an ability to participate in a discussion without resorting to attacks, including to members.   It drives people away from wanting to post at times.  That is divisive and not attempting to participate. 

 

The Ten's of thousands have violated their code of ethics.  That seems like put a liar on the stand and asking one to believe them.   And their assessment in that video is directly contradicted by actual staff in the WH...  

 

You seem to miss the point of most of what I've said.  I don't care if it was Trump or any target.  Try doing it on HC or O...  It should not be persistent attacks without any desire to discuss something. 

 

I am pro-TDB should be civil, respectful, and looking to engage in discussion.  Rants will happen.  But smear campaign comments on anyone is not talk.  Talk facts and then folks can decide to discuss or not.  Taking you and Ralis as an example... while you are anti-Trump you tend to provide some material to discuss if others want.  Some language comes out (at least it is not 5-10 times a day) but the content is usually presented with a potential item for discussion.   

 

You know as well as anyone, staff have their own opinions on life stuff.   So what if in the past a staff cycle was leftist ?  who cares.  I would guarantee that staff put aside their political leanings in looking at the board issues.   We have talked together long enough and politics never comes into the discussion, only forum decorum and rules.   

 

We're asking a pretty simple thing here that has always existed on the board but the O-G has allowed it to go further.  We are saying where the boundary is in regards to ANY post.   This is not about one member, one target, one thread.   This is applied board wide. 

[liminal_luke]

Well said, Trunk.  If there`s room on the board for Trump-love there must be room for Trump-hate.  What appears to some as "hate" could instead be understood as love-of-country, advocacy for responsible stewardship of environmental resources, a protective attitude towards economically or socially disadvantaged minorities,  a preference for peace...and so on.

 

Disagree?  Luckily (or perhaps not), there`s a thread in which you may voice your disagreement with as much gusto as you wish.  If you do so, you`ll likely find yourself surrounded by like-thinking internet friends.

 

Just understand that your point of view won`t be universally lauded.  A few liberal holdouts will continue to sound the alarm about Trump`s presidency.  Their voice may sound shrill, their posts repetitive.  You might find their daily rants to be lacking in the kind of rational policy discussion you prefer.  As Trunk mentions, the ignore button might be a useful feature in this instance, allowing you to curate your reading experience to reflect your reading preferences. To shut down such voices as "hateful" towards Trump -- an arguably useful and valid attitude -- is to take a fateful and ill-conceived step towards shutting down discussion altogether.