It’s naive to assume all moderators will make sensible decisions when you don’t know them.

Thanks for the response, that all sounds reasonable. One more question:

What happens if I attack someone’s actions and they feel personally attacked? For example, I might say that driving a petrol car, in 100% of cases, will contribute to a child’s chance of developing lung cancer. Another commenter who drives a car may then subjectively feel that they are being called a child murderer. I have stated an unbiased fact, but they have come to a completely logical conclusion and feel upset by that conclusion. So do we act as though I stated the emotional conclusion, or just the unbiased fact?

I’m concerned about the definitions of some of the terms in these rules

• What does it mean to be kind? Do you have to agree with everyone? Are you allowed to say the fuck word?

• What does it mean to attack other people? Are we talking ad hominem, or is making an argument with a stern tone of voice an attack?

• Where is the line between opinion and action drawn? Is it okay to attack people for driving cars? That’s not an opinion, it’s an action, and it kills people, but I have a feeling certain people would say no anyway

• What is a double post? Do you mean repost or crosspost?

Well I’m a Star Trek fan, and I’m optimistic that maybe the community between the stars is less narrow minded than the people on Earth today

Maybe climate change is the reason why. It’s a great filter that requires long term thinking and global cooperation to overcome. Maybe all the species similar to modern humanity end up polluting themselves back to the stone age and have to try again.

there is a zero chance we’ve made contact with non Earth life

Yeah! Because heavier than air flight is impossible, and there’s no way aliens could hold enough helium to fly to another planet!

(Our ideas about what is possible change as our technology advances)