I begin to wonder why debates between members of the forum over conflicting views and experiences cannot be expressed in a challenging way using reasonable language? Posts strictly for the purpose of a demeaning personal attack must be combated. Otherwise the discourse can state opposing views in a challenging way, but without snide personal remarks which degenerate the worthiness of the debate. Many times things are not just zero sum phenomenon, but rather opposite views are all part of the bigger picture and you are both right. But once a personal attack is made, the result becomes an obstacle in the discussion and people wonder like one member recently stated; is this forum a version of the Lord of the Flies? I’ll drop the analogy to tribes and call this failure to debate maturely the “lord of the flies syndrome”. That way no one is categorised into positive-neutral-or-negative Tribes which can be a little too concrete. Just my 2 pesos, Take it for what its worth.
