Tuesday's Most Active Threads

The most active thread yesterday continued to be the Israel-Palestine thread that I discussed on Sunday. That thread added another 1,200 new posts. The most active thread after that one was titled, "Invited neighbor friends over" and posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum. The original poster says that her family invited neighborhood friends who they hadn't seen in a while over for dinner and the couple showed up both wearing sweats. The original poster is not really upset but was a little annoyed that they didn't dress nicer. She asks what others think. This is obviously not the most important issue with which the world is dealing at the moment, but that doesn't stop posters from having fairly strong feelings about it. In fact, many of those responding seem to care a lot more about this than the original poster. A significant number of posters wouldn't be bothered by the neighbor's choice of clothing. A smaller number would be put off, though by how much varied from poster to poster. Some of these posters thought that coming to dinner in sweats reflected poorly on the neighbors and suggested a lack of class. On the other hand, a few posters opined that the original poster looked bad for being concerned. A lot of the discussion revolved around exactly what type of sweats the couple was wearing. I learned a new word, "athleisure" which apparently refers to sweats that cost a lot. At some price point it seems that sweats cease to be clothes for working out and become fashionable status symbols. However, the original poster clarified that the the neighbor's were not adorned in athleisurewear. This topic highlighted a host of supposed divisions. Whether these divisions were real or imagined is another story because a lot of them appeared to be based on inaccurate stereotypes. There seemed to be different opinions between young and old, or at least anyone expecting guests to dress up was assumed to be old. Similarly, some posters generalized about relationships between socio-economic status or political leanings and clothing choices. Few of these suggestions seemed to hold up. The thread also had the occasional hardliner such as a poster who would not accept a dinner invitation if she were required to "dress up", where by "dress up" meant wearing jeans.

Next was a thread posted in the "Jobs and Careers" forum. Titled, "Being summoned back to the office four days a week and anxious/sick over it", the original poster says that she has enjoyed working from home as it fits her personality better, she is more productive, and generally much happier than working in an office. Now she is required to return to the office and the thought of a long commute, bleak office, and the entire vibe of the office culture is causing her significant anxiety. She is not sure what to do. It looks like the original poster stopped posting after one subsequent reply. But, that didn't stop others from continuing the discussion for 10 pages. I haven't read much of the thread, but by now I am well acquainted with how this type of thread goes. Many posters tell the original poster to find a new job that allows for work from home. Others tell her to essentially suck it up and that they have no sympathy because they have had to go back to the office themselves. Then there is a debate about the pros and cons of working from home versus the office. Lots of posters have anecdotes that they believe supports one argument or another. One that stood out to me was a poster who seems to know the hourly schedules of everyone on his block. His complaint is that many of his neighbors who work from home are not productive. I hope this poster is himself retired or not working for some other reason because tracking his neighbors' activities to this degree must be a full time occupation. Generally, it appears that the biggest hurdle to working from home is the constant suspicion some people have that others are somehow cheating. That should really only be an issue to the individual's employer and not anyone else's business. Personally, I favor whichever working arrangement results in more frequent use of DCUM. Based on our usage statistics, DCUM is used more by those who work in offices. So, everyone back to the office, pronto.

Third was a thread titled, "Covid. The big shift" and posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. The entirety of the original poster's post was, "Life is not the same. I’m not the same person. Curious about others." If there was ever a post that could benefit from some fleshing out, this is it. But, the post was clearly sufficient for others as the thread managed eleven pages easily enough. Like the work from home topic, Covid topics seem never-ending. Admittedly, this one is a little different than most, but the thread still ended up addressing many of the same old topics. There are debates about school closures, vaccines, and, yep, working from home. One sort of new wrinkle were posts from those who didn't catch Covid until recently. They explained that they had felt that they had some sort of superpower or other advantage that had made them immune to Covid. Now that they have caught it, that image is shattered. Otherwise, there are posters for whom Covid has had lasting negative impacts and there are those who feel that they are better off for various reasons. There are a few posts in this thread that take unique or at least interesting angles on this topic. But, far more simply rehash the usual debates. 

The last thread at which I'll look today was posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. Possibly setting a record for title length, this thread was titled, "It's exactly times like this that you know if Trump were still president he'd do something wildly destabilizing". The original poster says that she just read President Joe Biden's initial statement about the Hamas attack on Israel and thought to herself that this is exactly the time that former President Donald Trump would have done something crazy. Several of those responding agree with the original poster. But, on the other hand, there are Trump supporters. Trump supporters, as we have seen for some time now, live in their own special worlds. According to them, Hamas would not have launched this attack if Trump were still President because Hamas wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of Trump's craziness. This suggests a massive misunderstanding of Hamas, but also even a general lack of understanding of current realities. What, for instance, could Trump do that Biden is not doing? Predictably, this thread almost immediately goes off-topic and becomes a run-of-the-mill argument between Trump and Biden supporters. To hear Trump supporters tell it, the Trump administration was a time of peace and prosperity in which all enemies cowered at the feet of America. In contrast, Biden has presided over a series of calamities. One of the biggest disputes in this regard involves the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. Biden supporters argue, accurately, that the timeline for the withdrawal was set by the Trump administration. Trump supporters appear to have forgotten that Trump initially wanted an even earlier withdrawal. Nevertheless, Trump supporters blame the chaotic and deadly withdraw as well as the subsequent takeover by the Taliban on Biden. It occurred to me while reading this thread that there is a logical argument that Trump contributed to the recent Hamas attack on Israel. One of Trump's proudest accomplishments in the Middle East was the Abraham Accords, a series of agreements between Israel and a number of Arab countries. One of the criticisms of the agreements is that they ignored the aspirations and needs of the Palestinians. Many observers cite the Biden Administration's progress on a similar agreement between Saudi Arabia and Israel as a factor in the recent conflict. Personally, I believe the planning and organization of the Hamas attack was started well before progress on a Saudi-Israeli agreement. However, it is possible that the earlier agreements convinced Hamas that there was no peaceful option for the Palestinians and that their position was significantly weakened by the Accords. This could well have motivated the organization to launch the type of "Hail Mary" attack that we have just witnessed. If true, it was not Trump's craziness that was the problem, but rather his failure to account for the interests of the Palestinians.