[handoflixue]

Fascinating claim that the scientists were removed for being "Partisan" in distributing information that disagreed with their opening speaker, but of course the opening speaker was somehow completely non-partisan in disagreeing with the banned scientists.

I don't really see how you can possibly have it both ways.

[xtiansimon]

“The bureaucracy” wants order in all things. They want to approve what is spoken, distributed, and discussed. Absolute control. No?

The more norms are changed, ignored, trampled, inverted, the more invested people will speak out.

On a personal level, I *broke decorum* this week with my dentist introducing “my own research” into a conversation. His first reaction was to say he discourages armchair medical advice from Google. I retorted: “I need the _words_ [to have a productive conversation with you in such a short time, so I can understand what you’re saying and what are my options]. I’m not a dentist who thinks about [dentistry] all day.” And following we had an informative conversation about the details I brought up.

But who amongst us lives in such conflict with power? It’s like a muscle. You have to exercise it once in a while or you’re stiff and easily overmatched.

[inigyou]

"Apolitical is when I agree with you. Political is when I disagree with you. And this is not a political space, stop bringing politics into everything or you're out!"

[m463]

"Let's compromise - if we agree we'll do it your way, if not we'll do it my way."

[selimthegrim]

Landry and the erstwhile NOCVB want to continue to guzzle corporate cash.

[bulbar]

Not saying that's what happened here, but the reasoning makes sense in general.

Partisans strongly dislike non-partisan positions, because they are even more dangerous to them than the partisan counterpart.