(12-07-2021 11:53 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(12-07-2021 10:54 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  So where do "Debbie Downer" articles fit?

IMO, they are there to be discussed by both sides, not to make one side or the other feel good/bad.

On climate change, I have always been about adapting to a process we cannot reverse. It appears to me the leftist side is always about turning the clock back, an approach I think doomed to failure.

I don't know exactly what you guys mean by a Debbie Downer article. Someone being pessimistic about something that someone else is optimistic about??

I'd think that inquiring (especially intelligent) minds would WANT to vet all the unintended consequences... the 'next domino' as someone (you?) likes to say.

Rice93 Wrote:Debbie Downer wasn't so much referring to the content of the articles, but your one-liners on the hyperlinks.

"Oh look... here's another thing that sucks."

"Hey guys... how terrible is this?"

"I hope I'm dead before these policies bear fruit." (*hyperbole warning*)

etc. etc. etc.

I don't read enough of the content of your links to have an overall impression of them.

This is the part I don't understand. You seem perfectly willing to engage with OO, both directly and indirectly on his 'contributions' to the articles, but you can't be bothered to actually READ the articles and attempt to provide 'the other side'?

If you don't want to respond then don't. It then of course BECOMES the echo chamber you feared... and defeats the purpose of the Quad, where intelligent and informed people can hear from different, equally informed and intelligent perspectives.