34

While I personally don't think that the answer is necessarily the best answer provided so far (I personally didn't vote on it and upvoted a different one), I don't agree that it does not answer the question. It starts with: A new*, deliberately pejorative, term to describe an old phenomenon, that of pressuring individuals or companies through the media when ...


24

Because sometimes people aren't rational. In fact, I'd argue that people are rarely rational, liberals and highly-educated people included. Most of our behavior is driven by factors other than pure, cold rationality – things like religion, tribalism, nationalism, patriotism, and the desire for the respect of our friends and neighbors, to name just a few. If ...


20

I want to spell out what the core of this dispute is, because I think that will help you guys as you try to establish policy about answers like mine. So... There is an essential confusion about what constitutes a 'discussable' group, not just here but generally. There are many groups that we are perfectly comfortable discussing politically: political parties;...


14

It's not a CoC violation. It's not smart by any stretch, but a CoC violation would have been a direct attack. Something along the lines of All [members of this political party] should die in a dumpster fire What Ted posted was more of a diatribe. It's not untrue, but he's juxtaposing his cariacatures of the Right so he has a straw-man to knock down in his ...


12

The only objective way to answer this question is to provide the intended meaning used by the majority of people who use that term. By all means: find the objective survey that establishes how the majority of people use the term. I couldn't. What's easy enough to find is expert opinion that backs up the answer you say is not objective: In that usage, "...


10

Sometimes the approach taken towards improving something is important. Your comments would be more likely to have been received well if they looked like constructive criticism trying to improve an answer, rather than appearing to be an apologia for female genital mutilation. In addition, it's worth noting that the question is more like "Why has the US ...


8

Not rude or abusive per the CoC I just flagged an answer that literally just said pretty much "The reason for X is because Left is rational and right is irrational", using a lot of randomly picked statements (can't even call them facts, because they are just that guy's personal opinions on which of his preferred ideological positions are rational)....


7

As the author of the answer that Swedish Architect (hereafter SA) takes exception to, I suppose I should offer my perspective... First, let me point out that SA has had a certain amount of input on my answer. If you look at the timeline of the answer, you'll see that SA offered an extensive edit on April 8, which I subsequently re-edited for balance, but ...


3

You've failed utterly to even attempt to provide any sort of evidence that the aforementioned answer, in its original form, violates the Code of Conduct in any way. What it seems to me, rather, is that you object to the content of said answer, and are effectively attempting to have that content censored by using the CoC as a hammer to do so. Ironically, this ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible