Member conduct

[Simon Darkshade]

It would seem to be the conduct of *a* member, which the subject then responded to quite clearly and capably. That original subject had just previously elected, rightly in my view, to recuse himself from further debate and discussion on that topic; this is likely to be for the best in such a non-clear cut situation.

Prior to that, we had managed to go through the six months of the conflict to date without issues cropping up. Perhaps, this might be a situation that has already solved itself in some ways.

The relevant Admin action was taken last Wednesday; repeating it after Edi had given his rather conclusive response to the Senior Chief’s belated interjection would seem to be an overreaction to a minor aftershock. The situation was one where someone was already voluntarily on their way out of a discussion and figuratively paused at the door to give a final reply to something yelled at them after they had already got up to leave.

Far from making me want to quit in disgust, having someone attempt to group me in with Hamas supporters because I called out a repeated silly and onanistic obsession with carpet bombing Gaza simply made me chuckle. Apart from these two cases, we’d be hard pressed to find any real issue of inter-member conflict crop up on the ‘2023 Gaza-Israel Conflict’ thread.

Indeed, insofar as there is a 'majority opinion' in that thread, it extends to a general support of Israel vs an immediate and permanent ceasefire. Within the former, there are different strands, with some calling for Israel to commit war crimes, but the fairly solid majority can be characterised as being generally supportive of their war aims; critical where warranted of how they are going about them; supporting the full release of hostages and the elimination of Hamas as a military force; and understanding that this type of urban warfare isn't going to be clean, quick or Hollywood.

It is unlikely that this majority opinion would take up their pitchforks and torches at any criticism of Israel or the IDF whatsoever; there might be a difference between that and, say, labelling every member of the IDF as guilty of war crimes, or stating incontrovertibly that Israel is engaging in a deliberate state policy of deliberate mass killings of civilians. That type of rhetoric might raise askance as to the source and standard of proof required to support such conclusions and what they mean.

[Bernard Woolley]

It’s been dealt with. So, I’m going to lock this thread and delete my OP.