Sure, mainly lefties here, with (for the most part) concurring viewpoints, but how freaking worthless as fuck is it to whine about this place being an echo chamber when just about every single freaking media outlet, whether they may be messageboards, or newsites, are, just as much, if not more, of an out-of-control echo chamber. The only exceptions that come to mind are maybe Reuters and AP, but other than that, might as well idiotically gripe about “oh, all the lefties here”, which would have just as much import. Octo was really bad with always spewing that expression, too. Figured too much of a derail to broach this in the Canadoper thread, which is the source.
Echo chambers are not places where people are constantly arguing with each other, as this place is.
But, to conspiracy theorists and other ignoramuses, any place where people agree with certain basic, verifiable facts might resemble an echo chamber.
…ber…ber…ber…ber.
Not true. “People’s Front of Judea” vs. “Judean People’s Front”, etc. There are no limits as to how finely people can slice their arguments (Splitter!). In fact, it often seems like the narrower a slice you have, the more vigorous the arguments there are about the tiny remaining differences.
Fine then, let me amend my statement; echo chambers are not places where people argue about substantive issues.
I get that the distinction is subjective, but I think objectively you can say that things like how the Gaza crisis should be handled aren’t just hair-splitting, and we have people passionate about both sides in such arguments.
I mostly agree with that, though I would say that certain substantive issues are essentially off the table here. If nothing else, certain types of threads tend to go off the rails immediately, even if there are are substantive arguments on both sides. I agree that Gaza discussion has mostly not done that (not to mention a number of other things).
Some are explicitly off the table per the rules as well. There is no question that there are subjects that aren’t up for discussion, but an echo chamber is a place where you can’t have any kind of meaningful discussions about anything without getting jumped on.
This place clearly is an echo chamber on certain issues. There’s a menu of topics on which certain species of dissension are expressly forbidden. I’ve never seen that on any other board before. The mature thing to do isn’t to take umbrage with people pointing this out. It’s to own it and say “Yeah, on these things we are an echo chamber, we like it that way, and if you don’t then fuck off”. But denying that the SDMB is an echo chamber, at least on certain issues, is just a waste of breath, frankly.
Well, there are degrees of echo-chamberiness. Even in an actual cult there are topics that are outside the “scripture” and can be disagreed upon. Probably some of that is necessary just to retain some kind of social order. But other topics must never be questioned.
Usually when someone accuses the board of being an echo chamber, it’s in response to an argument that they are losing because the facts are against them. And in that case, agreeing with the accusation is stupid.
But wouldn’t sites like Breitbart and 8-chan expressly forbid things like, say, DEI advocacy? I’m unfamiliar with those sites, so hopefully I can get clarification on this.
Are they losing, though? Or are they just being piled on by fifteen other posters who all think and act in roughly the same way? Posters who are echoing one another, here in this little virtual chamber? Because that can certainly look like losing, even though it isn’t.
I’m afraid I’m unfamiliar with them too, so I can’t say either. To be clear, I’m not stating as fact that the SDMB is the only board with a forbidden topics list, just that it’s the only one I’ve come across.
Thing is, losers are entitled to their opinions, but not the facts.
And the current “winners” are just jettisoning facts to fit the idea that “Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia” (Link is about the current Secretary of State, dismissing USAID now… after years of supporting it with good reasons.)
Yes. Explicitly so. When you claim that the 2020 election was stolen or that Biden was a master criminal and can’t get anyone to agree with your total lack of evidence to support your case, you’re losing.
Calling this place an “echo chamber” is what a loser whines about when they have an unpopular opinion, especially one based on total misinformation. It’s not something to be “embraced”.
The Straight Dope is the last place where we need to appease cranks.
Well-said.
If this place is such an intolerable echo chamber then why in God’s name are you guys wasting your time here? I didn’t understand that at all.
Not really, it always depends on the issue and the evidence. For example: a lot of people do believe is astrology, when it’s poppycock, no matter how some do think that they win arguments in their defense.
Serious Question: Is there really an actual menu of topics on which dissension is forbidden here or were you being facetious? I’ve never heard of that anywhere either but I’d like to see what’s on it if it exists.
Yes and no, recent discussions about rules show that (for example) denying the science of vaccines or climate change is off limits; however: discussing what is the better way to then deal with pandemics or carbon emissions is not forbidden.
(Of course, one can say that some groups are winning now with the denial of science out there, but in reality -as it is the view for many in the SDMB- it is a very losing developing for all people; yes, even for the ones that think that they are “winning” by pushing misinformation.)