I said exposed to the bright, glaring sunlight of factual rigor.
These words do not appear anywhere in your comment. Instead you said:
I advise allowing just enough politics to discuss the political issues tangent to other, more basic rationalist wheelhouses … Don’t go beyond that. There are people who love to put an intellectual veneer over deeply bad ideas, and they raid basically any forum on the internet
“Don’t go beyond that” seems to mean not allowing those politics and the bad-idea raiders. “Not allowing” does not mean “expose to sunlight”, it means “exclude”.
I didn’t say excluded from the conversation. I said exposed to the bright, glaring sunlight of factual rigor.
These words do not appear anywhere in your comment. Instead you said:
“Don’t go beyond that” seems to mean not allowing those politics and the bad-idea raiders. “Not allowing” does not mean “expose to sunlight”, it means “exclude”.
I’m not sure if this what eagain was alluding to, but this does seem advisable; Do not permit (continuous) debates of recognizably bad ideas.
I admit this is difficult to enforce, but stating that rule will, in my opinion, color the intended purpose of this website.
The word “bad” looks to be doing all the heavy lifting in here.
Which isnt being done because of what...? Widespread stupidity?