[hughesjj]

While I disagree with her on many things politically, Mace seems like a credible person to me.

Here's hoping that, if these things really do exist and isn't just a Honeypot or misinfo or whatever, they're there to keep us from being the idiots we are and all offing ourselves. Especially relevant when looking at "sundial" which was posted recently on HN

[lazyeye]

"While I disagree with her on many things politically..." a disclaimer like this is only ever made about Republicans. There are no exceptions. "I'm engaging with Republican without being directly critical, please dont cancel me..."

[hughesjj]

Nah, I've seen conservatives make similar statements when referencing Democrats before.

I've also done the same when referencing Democrats I disagree with politically, like the governer of WA I just voted for.

I think it's healthy to collaborate with or place trust in people you don't agree with in. In this case, we're talking about UAPs, which historically are associated with a lot of non-credible stories (imo) similar to Bigfoot chasers or Nessie believers. At this moment in politics, there's a lot of extremism and conspiratorial thinking with some of our elected leaders. One of our congresswomen literally claimed Jewish space lasers were influencing the weather. Some people apply heuristics when evaluating political viewpoints (I get it, there's a lot going on in the world and life is busy), so I wanted to call out in this case that the heuristic of "domain often associated with quacks" + "party which contains some prominent quacks" doesn't seem to match this situation or person.

Also, I'm an IC. I'm not worried about getting "cancelled" for any of my viewpoints. I'm a nobody, no one cares. You have to say some incredibly incensing stuff to get fired at my level just for expressing a belief outside of the workplace, unless the company sucks, in which case I'd be happy to leave anyway.