midlandsgrimpeur
Active Member
I'll argue with those who do it in good faith, even if points of agreement are unlikely. But if someone is going to repeatedly spout demonstrable lies on a forum, it's not in good faith; it's not even just attention seeking, it's a deliberate ploy to get everyone onto their lawn and to undermine rational debate.
Pushing back in worthwhile but only where it's worthwhile. Best way to "push back" against our local MUGa is to ignore it and it then goes quieter, and its mirrored Twitter content gets more ignored by the likes of Google (and the forum is a better place for everybody else).
I don't disagree in relation to bad faith actors. I think I was more generally interested in how and where do we find points of agreement on a wider level? We have a Reform party growing in popularity and whilst some of their supporters will be entrenched in their desire to vote for them, others will be on the fence and those who may be persuaded to vote Reform are also voters that surely those of us not in the Reform camp would rather find common ground with so as to dissuade them from this route.
How to we heal the division in such cases?