....is that, for starters, we often see aspects of people we'd be far better off
*not* seeing. Sure--it's easy to characterize them as "marina bar chat;" but
that is NOT what much of this is. Is it really likely that there would be these
kinds of acrimonious, polarizing discussions, replete with namecalling and
speculation about personal habits and ancestry in an actual bar? Of course not!
But the quasi-anonymity of Usenet seems often to give license for behavior that
would be unnacceptable--and even dangerous--in real life.

It's easy to say "just use your filters and shaddup" when people complain about
these highly unpleasant (and invariably unproductive) threads; but just as
people can't avoid slowing to gape at accidents on the freeway, people will
continue to read these threads. And they'll get a certain impression of the
newsgroup, just as they would if they went into a yacht club or marina bar and
found many of the regulars involved in loud, bitter, interminable and pointless
political discussions.

For my part, when I see the namecalling and personal insults, the polarized
thinking on both sides, it tends to give me a very unfavorable picture of ALL
the participants--and if I were seeing that behavior in a yacht club or marina
bar, I'd do a fast 180 and get out of there.

I think the same thing happens on Usenet as happens in The Real
World(tm)--people go where they feel comfortable, and where they feel they can
contribute and receive value.

Most of the time, in my observation, that's not happening here--even in spite of
a number of regulars who keep trying to guide the conversation back to boating.
I often wonder how many people here actually spend time on boats.

I have kept my own political views (and they are views that I hold dear) out of
this newsgroup--but if someone were to call me "light in the loafers" for being
a Democrat, or a "fascist" for being a Republican, I'd immediately lose interest
in any sort of participation here.

I don't think I'm alone in that respect.

Joe Parsons
FWIW