Wednesday's Most Active Threads

The most active thread yesterday was titled, "Dooce /Heather Armstrong" and was posted in the "Entertainment and Pop Culture" forum. Armstrong was one of the original "mommy bloggers", posting under the name "Dooce". She tragically died by suicide yesterday. This thread is currently eleven pages long which would be significant on its own, but a separate thread about her was also started and reached six pages before I locked it. I know very little about Armstrong and what I do know is limited to my brief interactions to remove inappropriate posts in threads about her that were occasionally posted on DCUM. As might be expected, posters familiar with Dooce posted about their surprise and sadness regarding the news. There is considerable discussion of her very personal and revealing blog. We have an informal but generally consistently-applied rule about criticizing individuals for the first 48 hours after their death. Because so much of Armstrong's life was apparently public, I had a hard time trying to draw a line between posts that were simply describing her life and those that were inappropriately negative. But, the thread was eventually growing so fast that I couldn't keep up in any case. As a result, the thread is likely very much out of compliance with our guidelines. The few times that I was able to read a few pages of this thread, I noticed that discussion had less to do with Dooce specifically, but more with "mommy bloggers" and others who lead their lives so publicly. In addition, there is considerable discussion of the "Get Off My Internets" website or GOMI. I also know about this website solely through earlier threads about Dooce and based only on that very limited knowledge, it appears that GOMI is basically devoted fulltime to critiquing bloggers and that Dooce was one of their favorite targets. As a result, there is considerable criticism of GOMI in this thread for potentially contributing to the blogger's mental health issues. While probably not appropriate for this thread, there is an interesting conversation to be held regarding discussion and criticism of those who willingly lead their lives very publicly. What boundaries should be observed with regard to those who themselves adhere to few boundaries?

The next most active thread yesterday was posted in the "VA Public Schools other than FCPS" forum. Titled, "Arl Dems Caucus Endorsement - School Board - In the Candidates' Words", the thread begins with excerpts of statements by two candidates running for the Arlington School Board. My understanding is that there are actually three candidates in this race. I'm not sure what happened to the third. Also, while I haven't read all of the 47 pages of the thread, what I have read suggests that even one of these two candidates does not have a signifiant role in the discusion. Instead, almost everything that I've read is about a single candidate and an organization with which she was involved. That candidate is Miranda Turner and the organization is Arlington Parents for Education (APE). Basically, many posters have a very negative view of APE and believe that Turner should be held responsible for anything involving APE. In these critics minds, APE is essentially a stalking horse for Koch-backed right-wingers who support Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin and have bullied anyone who didn't toe the organization's line. APE critics are particularly bothered by alleged APE activities during the COVID pandemic. Turner, for her part, seems to want to put that behind her and focus on the future. Her supporters argue that APE members hold a range of political views and that Turner's experience with the organization demonstrates an ability to work constructively with those holding differing opinions. Turner opponents have stretched the idea of guilt by association almost to its breaking point trying to tie Turner to Youngkin, sometimes engaging in somewhat unethical actions. For instance, someone adopting the moniker "Deep Throat" has been circulating an unsigned document making a number of unsupported allegations about Turner and others involved with APE. I was forced to get involved in this thread to remove links to that document which violated DCUM guidelines. In contrast, Turner's supporters have stressed her long and well-documented involvement in Arlington schools.

The third most active thread yesterday was titled, "Whistleblower accuses Biden of criminal conduct" and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. The thread begins by discussing a letter sent by Senator Chuck Grassley and Congressman James Comer — both Republicans — to the FBI claiming that the FBI has information about a criminal scheme involving President Joe Biden and complaining that the FBI has not publicized how it has responded to that information. Republican posters in this thread see this as evidence that the FBI is covering up derogatory information about Biden — exactly the result for which Grassley and Comer were hoping. Democratic posters, on the other hand, argue that the FBI by policy does not publicize unsubstantiated allegations and that the two Republicans are playing political games and interfering in an ongoing investigation. The problem that Republicans have had — which is amply discussed in this thread — is that they have not actually been able to find factual information tying Biden to illegal activities. Even Republican Senator Ron Johnson is quoted in the thread saying, "You have to infer what's happening here ... you're not gonna get necessarily hard proof". But, what Johnson means by "infer", others consider to mean "invent". The Republicans have put themselves in a difficult spot. They have spent years telling their supporters that Biden is corrupt and, when in power, the Republicans will expose him. Now that House Republicans have power, they have been unable to come through. As a result, they have resorted to making unsupported allegations and spreading innuendo such as the letter that inspired this thread. They are willing to undermine the FBI if that will help them keep power which is an extremely sad state of affairs.

The next most active thread was posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. Titled, "Just noticed the top flagships (besides in Ca) are all in red/purple states rather than blue ones". I am running behind today and I don't really have time to devote to his thread. Moreover, I am not sure that it really deserves much attention. Read it if you are interested.