[ameminator]

I (and many other users of this forum) have expectations on the minimum quality of discourse. Moreover, I am happy this forum exists with its quality of discussion. I am interested in preserving this high level of civilized interactions.

Time and time again, when it comes to the subject of Israel and Palestine, it has been shown that the discourse never meets the minimum standards I usually enjoy here. To the point where I am not sure if it's even theoretically possible.

To use your metaphor - if this were a forum about juggling, I would generally expect people to have an honest interest in juggling, and to have discussions about juggling. If every discussion about curling, on my juggling forum, devolved into abuse - it would be reasonable to avoid discussing curling (at a certain point).

[mistermann]

> I am interested in preserving this high level of civilized interactions.

Are you opposed in principle to even higher levels?

> Time and time again, when it comes to the subject of Israel and Palestine, it has been shown that the discourse never meets the minimum standards I usually enjoy here. To the point where I am not sure if it's even theoretically possible.

How much compute did you apply to the proposition, and what set of algorithms are you personally working with?

> To use your metaphor - if this were a forum about juggling, I would generally expect people to have an honest interest in juggling, and to have discussions about juggling.

Agreed. This site is, to some degree, about systems and programming, which involves analysis and logic. I would therefore expect that people would at least have at least some interest in the exercise of sound analysis and logic....and yet, as you note, on certain topics our normal standards within this system (HN forums) cannot be met. Is this not a rather curious phenomenon? Do you believe that it is perhaps worthy of some analysis (especially considering lives are literally in the balance)?

> If every discussion about curling, on my juggling forum, devolved into abuse - it would be reasonable to avoid discussing curling (at a certain point).

A problem: that which can be "reasoned" is not necessarily true.

Another problem: sometimes action (and inaction) has deadly consequences. If it was you living in Israel or Gaza, do you think you would be advising complacency and disinterest on this matter?

[ameminator]

It's not that I don't have an opinion (or even a strong one!) on this subject. The point is that everyone (and their mother) has a strong opinion, not only on the absolute morality of a side's actions, but on the morality of each source, of each agency involved, with various amounts of prejudice and superstition baked in.

Even worse, not one side is willing to really compromise. Even for the root issue of the Israel/Palestine conflict itself, it's impossible to "square the circle" on both the rights of each side, the motives of each side and the actions of each side. There's so much history and (mis) information flying around that it's hard for anyone to make a logical argument or contribute in a meaningful way.

I believe all of the above to be true and I believe the above could be overcome with earnest effort from both "sides" (if we are calling it that). Very, very rarely have I ever seen any attempt at compromising or meeting in the middle or having even a respectful conversation about this subject. So, inevitably, the conversation devolves into a mud-fight.

It's like "Godwin's Law" of geopolitics: any conversation about the Israel/Palestine conflict inevitably devolves into mud-slinging where both sides compare the other to Nazis.

So, forgive me if I want my tech-related forum to remain "mud-free".