Keeping politics out of banking discussions

moving some stuff in here…

1 Like

I’m not saying this because I’m personally offended by anything. You should see the absuive DM’s I get from, and you’ll understand I don’t get offended easily…

But as a member, who is hoping this forum does indeed take off into the multi cultural, FinTech inspired universe that it can be, the last 2 days have been a bit wearing (if not littered with some sound bites I never thought I’d hear :joy:).

I’m all for debate, I contributed to the thread yesterday (and this morning), although I can see this thread following the exact same path…

Might I suggest (and I’m not sure if this is possible), that these debates happen in an area of the forum where new users can’t see (or unregistered users), and it’s only people who’ve been here for a while (and likely worked out the… “quirks” of people’s personality) that can see, and participate in such discussions?

That way the regulars can continue to express their true opinions on both sides, and newcomers aren’t going to run for the hills after reading one thread?

Just a thought :grinning:


What would be left?



I’ll have a think about how we might do this.

Perhaps a Recchan vs the World thread, somewhere.

In respect of this topic though: can we try to keep this thread on topic and less dogmatic. Obviously if anybody wan’t to debate free market economics or ethics in employment law then probably we need another (off-topic) thread.


Off topic and on topic at the same time…

I know you can have areas that are only visible by certain people (like the “trailblazers” group in the Dozens forum), and the “Coral Crew” threads on the Monzo forum that no one else can see.

I guess it’s just assigning people a new tag?

I’m sure 90% of the discussion will be fine to stay in the main topic, but as soon as you start going down some of the routes over the past 2 days, an outside would get a very weird feeling about joining in…

I’ll have a think.

I am very nervous about censorship. Maybe just signed-in users, no special groups.

The terms of the site though do say ‘keep it PG’… and though there are some very difficult subjects being discussed - and a lot of opinion that’s pretty outthere, I still think it’s mostly within the bounds of what would be discussed in a typical day on a talk based radio station like LBC or talkRADIO.

1 Like

You can do it based on Trust Levels automatically assigned by Discourse. How well that works I’m not sure. I’ve never implemented it on the forum I manage elsewhere.

I think free market economics does come into play with this particular thread on work culture though :thinking:

It’s close, but I’m not sure your everyday FinTech enthusiast would expect to be reading some of the opinions on mothers, equality in the workplace and general work ethics.

PG on the sole basis that the words are within the rules, but the idealogy is very much non PC.

I’m not trying to censor it, I quite enjoy a good debate, and listening to people with the complete opposite opinion helps me learn.

But I’d fear for the growth of the forum when you look back at a few of the recent threads.

Not really, not on an ideological level.
The thread is about ‘the human cost’, the clue is in the title.
But without empathy, there’s not much you can add on that, so you quickly veer off towards ideology and dogma.

That’s not a criticism of you. I’m just pointing out that if you want to discuss free market theory, you should probably start a thread for that.

1 Like

Granted - which is why I’d rather see those things stay in the off-topic section.
Maybe I make that members only? I don’t know yet.


Free markets work for me every day. They let me choose the job I want, the food I want, the house I want.

Those who try to fix or rig the markets (eg leftwing authoritarians, or equally, corporate monopolies) always hurt my interests.

Conversely, those who allow the markets to flourish cause my choices to enlarge and my costs to fall.

1 Like

I permentantly browse by “latest”, not sure how everyone else uses the forums (which is why they are always front and centre for me).

Anyway, off out now! Enjoy your evening.

Perhaps try creating an “opt in category” for political chat. In Discourse, you’re able to create a category visible only to a sub-group of forum members, and then members can opt in or out of that group.

It’s not perfect but it works well on my forums, and keeps the public face of the forum distraction-free:

I actually have a similar hidden area for moving offensive posts to. It’s an option.


Offensive as in objectively or “I think most will dislike or disagree with this”.

Knowing you I assume the former!

Same here, so I see your point.

It’s actually empty, except for one thread that the author themselves asked me to move in there. Discourse wouldn’t let them delete after a while.

Beyond that it was created for the kind of sweary rants that a certain person from another place would post here during a bizarre game of cat and mouse that he was amusing himself with. He quit so it’s not really had much use.

Bugger! Now I’m off topic.

I’ve made some changes!

  • We have a new sub-forum, Politics
  • You can see and reply to existing topics in Politics only if you have a trust rating of 1 or above.
  • You need a rating of 2 or higher to create new topics.
  • I’ve banned Recchan*.

I’ve done a little bit of house-keeping to try and get some threads back on track and put threads in the right place.

If there are any posts or threads that you think could do with moving, please message me and I will take a look.

The trust level required to see Politics is low. I am opposed to censorship (within reason!) and want to make sure the board is open to as many as possible.

*That’s not true.