Thread now unlocked, but please stay polite.

The problem, in my view, is that some backroomers believe that only their opinion is allowed because they believe no other is justified, an must be either bonkers and/or extremist in nature, and thus the person espousing or agreeing with that view also must be as a consequence.

It's also why they ask them to prove their side, but never offer any of their own to prove their accusations. For proper debate to happen, it must go both ways, including acknowledgements when they are definitively shown to be either incorrect or being downright dishonest in what they've previously said.

Note that quoting a report of what someone else has said (but who themselves hasn't given any peer-reviewed hard evidence or that is contradicted by other parties but who are not referred to) is not evidence, but just opinion.

I saw this in the thread about the US elections where certain individuals essentially parroted the comments by many of our newspapers that had been essentially lifted from equivalent US outlets (including TV news), which itself had selectively lifted TV coverage/left other sections out to make what actually happened appear as something completely different - because those meadia outlets had an agenda against those they were talking about. They weren't reporting events as they happened in their entirety.

I would note that those leaving have been on the right side of the political fence, and those engaging in the sort of behaviour that leads to the threads being locked are of the oppsite opinion. Having a different view should not mean that those people should be forced out. If individuals cannot accept that, and want tepid discussions within their own political bubble, then they are more than welcome to set up their own or frequent a forum that is like that.

The whole point of free speech is that we ALL have to accept that not everyone agrees with our views, but has the right under the law to express them, as long as it does not encourage law breaking.

The problem comes - and is (IMHO) the worst aspect of the law (thanks to the Blair government, but kept on the books every since, so the Tories are just as much to blame here) at the moment is that 'offence' online can be construed as not acceptable, but does not define what it is, given that some people appear to be offended by ANY view that is contrary (in any way) to their own.

We should ALL be strongly arguing to our elected representatives for this aspect of the law should be repealed and never return.

I agreee that web forums should be capable of fairly discussing a range of issues - politics and contentious ones included - without difference in opinion turning into outright animosity and campaigns being waged to deliberately undermine individuals/groups on that forum. That is different from gentle humourous mockery between friends and 'opponents' who otherwise respect eachother, but hold differing opinions.

I get it that many of us are currently provberbially 'climbing the walls' due to lockdown fever and want to get back to our normal lives. There's obviously a great deal on that front to be discussed, but what it should do is make us lash out all the time because A feels differently to B in how we approach a problem.

This forum (and website) won't survive if things continue as they have been. I certainly don't want that, given there is very little truely independent journalism going on these days, and debates in forums, whether on newspapers' websites, social media sites or elsewhere barely exists - even before the pandemic - it's just one side ranting against the other.

It is also one of the reasons why I am against the lockdowns and for completely reopening, because not doing so actively discourages in-person discussions, because they are public - encouraging better behaviour and also because people not doing so cannot hide behind anonymous internet usernames. I suspect a lot of people would not be willing to sacrifice that at the present time.

Thanks for taking the time to read my (long) comments. Enjoy your Easter 'break' - get outside and talk to people. It certainly helps me.

Valid points sammy1 but where discussions sail too close to the line in terms of things getting a bit personal, we have to intervene.

ORB and myself have discussed this and we will re-open the 'which vaccine' thread but for the last time, so it's up to everyone to keep thinks civil.

I will lock this thread now and re-open the other one.