A Reply to "Phillip Martin - We Want You Back"

Someone brought this article on BridgeWinners to my attention. Here is my reply.

A few months ago, there was a thread on BridgeWinners discussing COVID vaccine mandates. I don't recall now whether it was specifically ACBL mandates or mandates in general. In any event, I expressed the opinion that there is not a one-size-fits-all answer to the question of whether one should be vaccinated. Since there are individuals for whom, for reasons of demographics or personal health history, the vaccine offers a greater risk to their health than remaining unvaccinated, it is a decision each person must make for himself in consultation with his doctor. For a business to adopt a policy that discriminates against the unvaccinated is, in effect, to pressure people into making a medical decision that may go against the advice of their own doctors. I find that unconscionable.

I am aware that there are potentially valid counter-arguments to my position. Whether one finds my argument or the counter-arguments more compelling depends on a number of factors, perhaps most importantly on where one fits on the individualism versus collectivism spectrum. I do not, however, think "You're an idiot" is one of those potentially valid counter-arguments, and I said as much to Eugene Hung, BridgeWinners' moderator.

Eugene declined to remove the offending remark. Apparently, it did not violate community standards. I realized he was correct. Gratuitous abusive remarks are quite in line with BridgeWinners' community standards, despite posted guidelines to the contrary. I had to question why I belonged to a community where that was the case. Such uncivil remarks lower that standard of discourse and can make the experience of reading the site unpleasant whether they are directed to you or to others. While, sadly, this is true on just about any forum when the discussion becomes political, it is often true on BridgeWinners even on strictly bridge discussions. Over the years I had hidden some users who repeatedly use abuse as a debating technique. But one can't get away from it altogether.

Even the page linked to above offers an example: an unnecessary uncivil remark, terminating with a sarcastic "Truly remarkable." Admittedly, the comment was not grossly uncivil. But it was uncivil enough to make me cringe. When one encounters such comments time and time again, it makes the overall experience of the site unenjoyable. And if I found the site unenjoyable, why was I even there?

I decided if calling someone an idiot did indeed not violate community standards, it was time for me to exit the community. So I asked Eugene to terminate my account.

I do appreciate Cameron's article and the supporting comments. But actually there is no reason for me to return to BridgeWinners. Anyone who wants to hear my insights--or outsights--on bridge, as well the occasional Lowenthal story, can do so right here. I restarted the blog after the kerfuffle for that very purpose.