Civil debate
For several years now, a group of old and aging Boulder-area men have met each Wednesday morning to discuss anything other than football, which took considerable restraint when Coach Prime came on the scene. We range in age from early 70s to mid-90s.
Our discussions are friendly and supportive, often illuminating, never boring. We have scientists, investment professionals, an historian, a physician and psychiatrist, a musician, professors, teachers, newspaper owners and publishers, a mathematician — even a Rhodes Scholar — among our ranks. There always is something to hear, something to learn, something to respect. Interestingly, it isn’t so much credential that makes our people enjoyable as it is respect for each other. To be sure, we are diverse in our political views and wide-ranging in our chosen careers.
Apart from the topic limitation mentioned above, we have only a couple of other rules: 1. Ad hominem attacks are forbidden and grounds for expulsion. 2. One conversation at a time, please.
I notice your new editor, Shay Castle, has established the first as a rule for letters to the editor and for op-ed submissions (“Strong opinions, loosely held,” Jan. 4, 2024). With this civilized ground rule, I suspect Boulder Weekly will collect and publish thoughtful, constructive commentary, and I for one look forward to supporting the effort.
We are sorely in need of respectful idea sharing in these times. As Ms. Castle has said, attack the idea but not the person.
— Ron Stewart, Lafayette
Breaking the rules
Dear Boulder Weekly,
Donald J. Trump is a stupid and evil person who hates poor people.
Regards.
— Peter Aretin, Boulder
Editor’s note: We used this exact line (albeit with a different, fake name) in our recently published op-ed guidelines as an example of the kind of thing we wouldn’t print.
We appreciate your cheekiness, Peter. Some rules are meant to be broken.
Have something to say? Write your own LTE: [email protected]