Not sure what this line was getting at then:
Moving on…
Not fixating at all.
If it’s who I think it was, I blocked them eons ago and didn’t have to deal with their shenanigans, but yes, I was also glad to see them go because they contributed absolutely nothing to any aspect of the website. Again though, this is tangential to the question I was raising.
If that happened, it shouldn’t have and I’m not opposed to that at all.
Not sure what point you’re trying to make here. I do enjoy off-topic discussion and obviously engage in it. But the primary purpose of my membership on this forum is going to be the topic of the forum, and not the off-topic. Any off-topic conversation I engage in is tangential and going to occur inside the context the original topic of the forum. If the off-topic starts to encroach on the on-topic, then spin off (which is apparently what happened).
For instance, I don’t go to a firearms forum and expect to have a discussion about abortion. If I can, great, but if it creates too much conflict and fractures the firearms community, it makes total sense to ban it.
The point I’m making is that this:
is a completely separate issue from this:
One of these issues is a fundamental disagreement about the purpose of the forum, the other is a realistic question about the efficacy of the moderation efforts of the forum. For the prior the purpose of the forum is quite clear - to foster a community that can discuss technology. The purpose of the off-topic seems obvious as well - to assist in the fostering part. Insofar as the offtopic section accomplishes that, it’s great. But when it drives a wedge into that, well, it’s actively detrimental to the actual purpose of the forum - discuss technology.
I don’t understand how this answers my question. It seems like if anything, the off-topic section drove you away, along with whatever positive contributions you were making, which is what I was getting at with my original post.