Community values at UA and RF

While I was cooling off last week, I threw out a question regarding the rules for the UA and RF threads, but Dorian shut the whole thing down because we’d already covered just about everything important.

Now that I’ve broken free from my own mental fog and am being driven by pure curiosity, I’m going to pose that same question to the moderators of those two specific threads again:

Can I ask a quick question about the rules laid out in the opening posts, since I clearly don't have anything better to do with my time on this forum?

Cultured and reasoned debate, civilized behavior, the principle of equality among all participants, tolerance, fairness, the principle of unity, efficient discussion, respect for individuals, and listening to arguments from all sides are the fundamental and highest values of the Politics subforum.

I don't really have an issue with the rules themselves—I mean, sure, I might slip up and break one now and then, but there’s never any malice behind it.
However, that bolded part, the principle of unity, is a total mystery to me, especially when looking at the two threads I frequent—RF and UA.

On those threads, almost everyone is split into two warring camps. People start throwing insults at the opposing side, spreading misinformation without checking facts, and it honestly feels like people are ready to go to war just to prove that whoever the other camp is rooting for is the "bad guy."

It gets so intense that people actually label supporters of the opposing side as traitors to American national interests.

No side is immune to this, myself included. Okay, fine, I don't think I've done that last part, but still, I have no right to throw stones at anyone else.

So, how exactly do you plan on enforcing this "principle of unity"?

If you think it's actually impossible to implement, maybe it would be better to just strike it from the rules in the intro for those two threads?

Since you already asked this in a locked thread, I didn't bother responding... I think the rule needs to be read in its entirety; certain things are obviously hard to expect in threads like that, but we aren't going to delete everything regardless.

Charles Fox10 said:You actually asked this in a locked thread, so I didn't give you an answer... you really have to read that rule in its entirety because, let's be honest, expecting certain things in those kinds of threads is a tall order, but we aren't just going to wipe everything out in there.

I figured you weren't answering because Dorian shut the thread down, not because you were giving me the cold shoulder.😁

I still don't quite wrap my head around setting up rules that are basically impossible to follow—not to mention how the current thread feels like it's constantly being suffocated—but hey, it’s not my job to write or enforce them, so that's entirely up to you guys.

In my view, having a solid set of enforceable rules acts as a great framework for running a discussion; it gives people a clear idea of the boundaries, lets the mods establish a fair way to play the game, and keeps things orderly. Right now, though, it all feels a bit murky to me. There's also this mention of justice, which is totally opaque to me; I have no clue what that actually entails, so I could easily end up breaking it without even realizing it, much like how I'm still completely lost on what someone meant by "Joseph's New Justice"—I mean, I certainly haven't felt the impact of that policy after one term.

But hey, if I'm the only one overthinking this... my bad.

I realize being a moderator is already a tough gig as it is, without having to deal with someone nitpicking every single rule.