>Only prohibition, the war on drugs, #metoo, and BLM had noble goals.
That distinction is entirely in the eye of the beholder.
Some say McCarthy was vindicated with the release of the Venona papers and the declassification of documents from the Soviet Archives. Many of the accused were in fact spies for the Soviet. Also the stolen secrets for making the Atomic bomb almost brought the world to an end.
>I suspect that the fallout from virtue signaling and bad actors taking advantage of #metoo and BLM probably won't be too bad; certainly not on the same level as the rest.
It's sad to see how you have to walk on egg-shells to placate the BLM zealots and still get downvoted and somebody is probably already combing through your post-history.
Would be cool if "downvote"(for relevance)and "disagree" would be mutually exclusive (either/or).
You either decide this post is not relevant to the discussion at all or you disagree with the argument.
"Upvote" for relevance and "disagree" could be combined.
You decide this post is relevant to the discussion but you disagree with the argument.
Of course everything depends on users using the tools in good faith. But it would be an interesting approach to decouple "downvoting" from "disagreement".
That distinction is entirely in the eye of the beholder.
Some say McCarthy was vindicated with the release of the Venona papers and the declassification of documents from the Soviet Archives. Many of the accused were in fact spies for the Soviet. Also the stolen secrets for making the Atomic bomb almost brought the world to an end.
>I suspect that the fallout from virtue signaling and bad actors taking advantage of #metoo and BLM probably won't be too bad; certainly not on the same level as the rest.
It's sad to see how you have to walk on egg-shells to placate the BLM zealots and still get downvoted and somebody is probably already combing through your post-history.