I honestly feel like this discussion, by focusing on the titles and OP's initial content, is missing the real issue with the thread(s) in question. I personally very rarely agree with Damiana's personal takes on issues, but she's more than free to post about them and defend her own views. I might think she's missing the point, or even that she's completely wrong, but that doesn't mean she shouldn't be allowed to hold those opinions. In fact, I might even think Damiana is a terrible, horrible avatar of everything that is wrong and evil in the world (I don't), but that still wouldn't mean she shouldn't be allowed to hold those opinions.
The core issue, to me, isn't that one, two, or even three people hold what I would call somewhat extreme positions. The issue is that some people - sometimes people with extreme positions, sometimes others - seem either unable or unwilling to discuss sensitive topics without resorting to extremely poor argument form and even insults and personal attacks. This, to me, is inexcusable. We're all adults here, or at least old enough to be expected to act like adults, and I believe that means it's reasonable to expect civil discourse even when you disagree with someone.
Just follow some simple guidelines (spoiler because the list got long, and isn't entirely pertinent to the subject of my post)...
- If someone posts something you disagree with, don't take them out of context. If you can't counter their point within the context it was made, you can't counter their point. It's that simple. If you have to manipulate their post to win, you need to reconsider your own point, not just cherry-pick.
- If someone takes you out of context, make your context clear, and explain why their new point doesn't stand up to your initial argument when taken in context.
- If you feel that a point was made badly, for example using a misreading of data, or a bad source of information, feel free to call them on it, but be polite. Perhaps they didn't know the source was bad. Perhaps they didn't realize they were misreading the data. Perhaps they were just trying to make a bad argument to win easy points and failed. There's no reason to respond to badly made points with anything other than civility. If you want to really move the discussion forward, post alternative data reflecting what is, in your view, a more accurate portray of the information. It's not necessary (you're not writing a thesis, you're under no obligation to provide sources), but they do help your argument.
- If someone's view is, in your opinion, stupid, idiotic, or evidence of the poster being a bad person, keep it to yourself. Personal attacks and insults don't help the conversation at all. If anything, they make you look like a weak debater who can't separate the topic from their personal feelings towards their opponent, and is so wound up in winning that they've decided the best tactic is ad hominem.
- If someone insults or personally attacks you, just ignore it. It's our own choice whether or not we get offended or upset over things like this, and whether we want to continue to derail a thread over insults. As mentioned above, by insulting or attacking you, the person attacking you is doing little else other than showing that they're incapable of further debating an issue (or at least entirely unwilling to further debate the issue). Call it out when it happens, if you want. Let everyone know that that's what the debate has come to, and that you're not interested in a personal battle, then drop it. If you let it go, that's a win for you. If you respond in kind, with insults and personal attacks, you're equally responsible for the situation, as you've chosen to continue to derail a thread with your own ad hominem.
Overall, just be decent in threads. Try to avoid fallacies if you can, and consider the points of others before telling them they're wrong. Be civil, and act like an adult who is capable of getting into discussions on topics that other people may have differing, sometimes vastly differing, opinions on. It really isn't as hard as some people make it out to be, and I don't feel that it's asking to much to expect CASS posters display some ability to disagree with others without resorting to the kind of behavior I've been talking about in this post.