Lol…why do I always get tarred with the same brush…I only reply!
The problem from my perspective is why should I give free adverts for daft ideas (Yes, I believe they exist by the way and that there’s more than ample evidence for their existence contained within the very long threads you talk about).
ITo cut to the chase with the thread you talk about, I think I suggested within the first few posts, starting a new thread (in off topic) for all the club ideas that Blindsite and the poster wanted to discuss. No other thread need have been started other than this and the thread would have not involved me whatsoever - that’s why I lobbied long and hard to have the off- topic category created in the first place - to keep it off the front page. If its on the front page then I’m going to respond to it.
I have no technical knowledge hardly, yet I’m sure any thread about smart contracts could just have been joined, as that was the only relevant thing really that was asked about that was relevant for the front page. There was no technical discussion to be had about how this app could be implemented for the purpose intended either physically or logically. All of his was pointed out in various ways by both myself and @Artiscience and the thread could have ended very early. The thread also had a misleading title and had nothing whatsoever to do with Law.
The thread became interesting for me when discussing related politics/philosophy, but descended into nonsense really, as usually happens…same old same old…Arguments are never conceded even when totally blown out of the water in order to promote the same old incoherent, self contradictory arguments etc, clutching at the flimsiest straw and the strongest arguments always premised on edge cases - usually the very event horizon of the very outermost edge case…before we all go spinning in to some Black Hole of insanity! s I say, there was no need for me to have had to reply to Blindsite…there really wasn’t…it should have been in off-topic in my opinion, and whatever wasn’t off-topic could have joined a smart contract thread.
Lol…he poked me!
Lol… this was the other idea I suggested along with the off topic
I don’t really blame the mods - it’s not like this whole tangled thread is easy to unravel…and I don’t just mean the arguments.
I do what I do and won’t change…if someone is promoting a political ideology, pseudo-science, quackery, irrationality or illogical posts on the main forum, then I will always in every circumstance challenge it.
I’d probably say split, but only to save scrolling and not sure how important that is really. I can’t think of any other reason myself and don’t mind either way.
I think as I’ve said that the recent topic itself should have been carved up in the way I suggested