Suppose someone went to a discussion board whose community values differ more from ours than those of the “red tribe” (e.g islamists, putinists or CCP ideologues). Wouldn’t you think this was a good thing, helping both sides understand better how the others see the world?

That’s fine. You can stay away from them as much as you want. I just dont get the rationale for shaming people for engaging “the other side” in conversation

You can be a moral purist all you want, but honestly, what is your end game? Do you expect the “other faction” to just all suddenly come to the realization that you were right all along, and that they were contemptible bigots who had been mislead by disinformation ?

If we want to find a way to live alongside people who don’t share our values, the first step will be to find a way to communicate across the sociocultural fault line. That requires that we do not wall ourselves into separate corners of the internet

«The world is what it is; men who are nothing, who allow themselves to become nothing, have no place in it»

While most of the alternatives to democracy have been tried, there are many alternatives to the publishing system that have not been tried and may be superior.

I was not trying to make a point about inexact wording, and I apologize if that is how it came across. My point was that there may exist better systems for evaluating science that have not been tried.

I believe the quote was "all the others that have been tried". The system was well suited for an era when the limiting factor was the cost of printing and distributing paper journals. When distribution of information is essentially free, other systems may work better for identifying scientific value

Same. Have no desire to speak ill of the dead, but I wished they had left this sentence out of the obituary: "He will be remembered for his remarkable contributions to the psychology world and as a defender of expression without undue fear of reprisal." Simply not true.

The data used for this map seems off. Having worked in hospitals in both countries, I refuse to believe that the death rate in Norway is double the rate in Ireland

I like this taxonomy, but the examples given are not convincing. Most missingness is dependent on unseen data, so I understand that it is difficult to find good examples, but they could have tried to find some plausible random missingness mechanism for illustration