So where are they and what are they doing? (page 11 of 33)

Who are these people??

LOL Kate, I love your reply!!

She’s talking about Jésus Djalma, and Yahweh and Allah and Shiva and.......................

Oh really? I think those who are at war primarily want to defend or keep their land. That’s very often the case in a conflict.

People whose reasoning hasn’t evolved beyond bar-tabac counter discussions

At its core, it’s a bit like the café-philosopher mocking the bar-tabac, with its false collar of class contempt.

... and to argue.

Just make sure not to confuse arguing with talking points.

Stylistically, why bring this question here? What’s the goal?

Finally, anyone who prides themselves on being at the forefront of reviving VF should consider that it might be counterproductive.

Thanks for your friendly reply, even if it’s a bit light on details about the topics mentioned. Have a great day!

I went back to that other FV forum

Why not explain yourself over there?

I’m sure you’d start the pointless fight you’re looking for.

I keep wondering, but why go anywhere else, and what’s the point? It’d be fun to run into some of you while traveling and chat about the different topics in this thread. In person, there’s a good chance it’d go really well. Writing just doesn’t capture everything and can be so limiting.

I beg to differ: the topics are so divisive that discussion becomes impossible, like a new Dreyfus affair. Remember the cartoon of a completely devastated lunch table with the caption: "They talked about it." You end up losing friends or else you have to stoically keep quiet. For me, an honest and enriching discussion should be based on research from articles, books, and programs made by specialists on the issue rather than stubbornly clinging to talking points. (Their place of manufacture is supposedly in England; they already have experience with Fortitude.) But be careful—there’s one topic you can’t discuss: the Middle East. Indeed, if you criticize certain aspects, you could face legal action.

By the way, how’s Machu Picchu?

even if it lacks a bit of argumentation on the topics mentioned

On the contrary, I think their argumentation is relevant:

After all, those who claim to be at the forefront of reviving VF should consider that it might be counterproductive.

Isn’t the topic "But where are they and what are they doing?"

By the way, why did you ask me that question?

There wasn’t a question in my message...

But if we must continue, I’d phrase (a little differently) the same questions as Voyajou: Why import two topics here—from the other forum where you seem to spend a lot of time—one of which caused a firestorm on VF before it shut down? What’s the goal here?

@Zorba

The topics are so divisive that discussion is impossible.

Yet there were discussions on VF, well-mannered ones, about divisive topics. And if some were locked, it was often after many pages.

@Herodotos

Isn’t the topic "But where are they and what are they doing?"

Has the discussion evolved to the point where it no longer relates to the original premise—is that such a big deal?

The raw material of VF, what made (makes?) it rich, different, unique, was those lively discussions, no matter the section. Those words that turn into ideas, arguments, that sometimes brilliantly bounce from one screen to another... it’s inevitable—and should we even avoid it?—that they take a detour when the initial topic seems exhausted.

is it really that bad?

No, there’s something even worse, obviously! I don’t really care if he flaunts his ideology in every discussion. But I know exactly where he’s trying to lead us with his talking points—and he’s doing a great job of driving people away! That’s not what the original post was about, as far as I know, right? That’s all!

He can flaunt his ideology all he wants in discussions—I couldn’t care less, really. But I know exactly where he’s trying to lead us with his talking points, and when it comes to scaring people off, he’s doing a great job!

But maybe no one’s actually falling for it... And if we’re going to face rough winds, we might as well do it knowing who’s pointlessly fanning the flames.

As for thinking that even the most toxic discussion could scare anyone away—hmm... why give certain people that much power?

The other sections of VF rarely get splashed by what’s exchanged here, so by skipping certain threads or even blocking some members, you can still enjoy the best of the forum in peace... the travel journals, the contests, the joy of sharing tips, planning trips, joking around...

In real life, just like in the vir...tual one, ideas, opinions, arguments, beliefs, and ideologies that clash with our values are all around us. Fight (or debate). Ignorance. Indifference. Humor. Compassion. Disinterest... There’s a whole range of ways to deal with it so everyone can pick what works for them to live more or less peacefully with—and among—those oh-so-daunting others.

Hello,

And above all, they should stop importing this to us, when we have mountains of other extremely serious issues to deal with.

At home... who is this "us" you’re speaking for here?

Catherine 😐

Hello Kola,

And while we’re facing harsh winds, we might as well do so knowing who’s pointlessly stirring them up.

Well, that’s quite the turn of phrase. References to the 1940s, references to Pétain... Anyone who doesn’t think like you gets painted as some kind of demon just to shut them out. Is it really necessary to stigmatize someone just because their ideas bother you?

such power to certain people

Here again, it’s more than just a turn of phrase—it’s the expression of a very specific kind of activism in what seems like an innocent sentence. Why this sudden, ideologically charged militant tone?

In real life as in the vir...tual world, ideas, opinions, reasoning, convictions, and ideologies that clash with our values are all around us.

You’re right; in fact, the ones that bother me or annoy me are in your posts—this way you have of always being right in such a condescending manner, and how you express it with little flourishes (like "in the vir...tual world," for example) have long kept me from interacting with you more, just like with Voyajou, for that matter. You all gang up on Joël; Herodotos reproaches him for not sticking to the "original topic," as if talking about certain things is dangerous, harmful, or forbidden.

Maybe I’m just nostalgic for a more open and liberal VoyageForum, a time when thought policing wasn’t part of the dominant discourse and didn’t seep into places of exchange and creativity like this forum. We had a lot of fun back then.

Michel

Maybe I’m nostalgic for an open and liberal travel forum, a time when thought policing wasn’t a thing

You’re blind, Michel.

Thought policing was in full force on this forum during Covid—shutting down any discussion and only allowing François’s single opinion to be displayed.

Anyway, I’ll leave you to your illusions or your bad faith.

In person, there’s a good chance it’d go well

Sure, we can chat about the health benefits of kiwis or discuss the actors’ performance in *A Bear in the Jura*.

But when it comes to divisive topics? No way.

Take a certain Donald, for example—he just can’t help being himself.

Hello

And while we’re facing evil winds, we might as well do it knowing who’s futilely stirring them up.

Well, here’s a fine piece of rhetoric. References to the 1940s, references to Pétain...

“And I’m off in the evil wind that carries me away…” “As Verlaine so aptly put it about the evil wind, I’ve come to tell you that I’m leaving…”

Other references that point to different worlds, certainly closer to Kola’s, unlike your unkind claims.

You're blind, Miche The thought police were in full force on this forum during Covid, shutting down any discussion and promoting François's singular opinion. Anyway, I’ll leave you to your illusions or bad faith.

No, Agnès.

Even after the forum was closed, François expressed his take on the situation—as the owner and founder of the site. Personally, I can understand why he might have acted that way given the context at the time.

This has nothing to do with censorship or enforcing a single narrative to fit some "truth." Joël is referring to a forum that requires unconditional adherence to an authoritative stance—that *is* thought policing.

Michel

Michel, I think we haven’t always seen eye to eye, but what I know for sure is that you were right in your message. I really didn’t have any goal or most of the thoughts people attribute to me. As for the other forum, I’m not really off-topic if we go by "But where are they..." As for the inquisitors, they always manage to burn a few witches, don’t they? And that doesn’t stop them from sleeping soundly afterward: "But good people don’t like it when You follow a different path than theirs"

I still believe that more than one former participant will come back as activity picks up on VF. And let’s keep things in perspective: the main activity (and what remains the most interesting) is in the "Destinations" and "Travel Journals" sections.

These past few weeks, I’ve really enjoyed the "Travel Journals" section. Kudos to those who contributed, often with little masterpieces.

The politics of thought existed here too. But strangely, when you share it, it bothers you less. 😏