I too had comments flagged as “off topic” in that Off Topic thread. Apparently, implying that the main proponent of the discredited drug is a habitual liar is off-topic in a thread about the drug pushed by the habitual liar.
No, you were evading flags by simply adding an additional word. That’s not in anyway making the post conform to the community guidelines, which is why one is allowed to edit a post.
Except it’s not.
You were harassing someone with off topic political remarks.
And there’s another rule broken right there at the end of that sentence.
Don’t break our forum rules.
You just tried to play the victim card and harass me again after I attempted to give you a chance to correct things privately.
“Off Topic” just means the topic isn’t a DMS topic. It has nothing to do with off-topic posting from the topic of a specific thread. If the thread is about a study regarding a medical thing, cool. When that thread derails to just ranting about politics rather than the original topic, not cool.
Want to make a topic dedicated to debating whether or not trump may or may not have dementia? If it could be kept civil (though good luck with that) and in its own thread then go for it. Don’t make a thread with linked medical research in the OP, then use the rest of the thread to fling political mud.
To quote what was tagged as the “solution” in that thread:
I’ve already been debating reviving the opt-in debates category to dump that stuff into since, frankly, most people on this board don’t want to see it and that type of arguing and s***posting is the most common complaint I get about talk.
Whilst I could argue about how any “study” that quotes medrxiv** 26 times as references shouldn’t be considered a valid study, that’s an example of an acceptable reply to the thread in question as an ongoing discussion.
** medrxiv, for those who don’t know, is a pre-print service for explicitly non-peer reviewed papers, with no retraction issuance or validity checks whatsoever
Risch is not the Epidemiology Chair in the Yale School of Public Health. That position belongs to Judith Lichtman PhD, MPH. Risch is a Professor of Cancer Epidemiology in the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at the Yale School of Public Health and Yale School of Medicine.
Attempting to help. Topic threads should follow 1 thread. When they don’t… things get flagged as “OFF TOPIC”. The original thread was originally about the drug. If you want to post research studies… discuss efficacies and testing methodology… do it there. Things were flagged there because it spiraled into political. Yes… currently this drug is tied to politics tangentially but they should be different threads so people can ignore political if all they want is to read about thoughts/studies regarding the drug.
This topic is about wether folks are getting silenced on Talk or DMS. If you can’t stick to one topic in a thread, it’s not a conspiracy it’s a self fulfilling prophecy.
What you say only applies to politically charged items. Other threads that wonder off topic are split. Clearly the moderators have a bias in this case vs. other cases where one will split the thread. It is disingenuous to imply that this flagging is about being “off topic”.