@unabogie @ravirockks @Popehat This is a great response if in your mind:

- Anything that has a goal of Racial Equity is Good.
- Anyone that opposes Good things must therefore not share my goal of Racial Equity.

AA isn't automatically good (or even OK) because Black people have suffered more negative effects from racism. Schools can find a better way, and they've already started.

Federally-funded benefits based on race is unconstitutional. Appeals to emotion ought not convince us otherwise.

@nixCraft

∏, what else?

Like it's supposed to type out its whole dang genome

@fraying My response wasn't intended to contradict your point. In fact I acknowledged your point, so I feel shut down by your dismissive reply.

In the past I've encountered people who say their feelings aren't being respected when others disagree with their position. I tend to think this is not a constructive way to conduct discussions; I was adding my experience to the conversation.

Have a nice evening -

@fraying I always believe them, and try to treat them with respect.

The sticking point is that someone's feelings don't make their opinions more (or less) valid. This is usually where the real disagreement begins.

@Popehat I think it should be easy for people to opt in to well-known and conventional-by-consensus Mastodon filters.

Those who consume content are ultimately responsible for controlling what they consume. To burden posters with figuring out what is acceptable to everyone is not tenable. Alienates good-faith posters who intend no harm to their readers.

The trick is that the platform design has to enable readers to own this responsibility without requiring special effort or technical knowledge.