Why must we "debate?"

I thought we were here, and within Agora's 6 rules, to discuss.

Why do discussions turn into a debate in the 1st place?

No need for me to suggest why or answer my own question, as people here are not naive.

Whether members here like it or not, this group has evolved to what it is today, shaping itself for discussion that is acceptable, based on not what is said, but how it is said.

My "circling the airport and never landing" comment could have been a basher comment, and a justified violation, but it was presented as a description on how owning EDIG has felt like, with a tad bit of humor along with it. How it is said is the key here to discuss vs debate.

At my other hub, we have the same "policy" and only one guy there owns a little EDIG (fastfoot) but has only posted here a few times and it was long ago. We do not debate there either...we discuss and share thoughts about the company and it's future, not past failures. Same thing that is prefered at this hub.

Agora's 6 rules establish a "code of conduct." What's wrong with that? If people want to make comments about the past, errors, bad decisions by management, failed at this, failed at that, why own the stock? Why post here, stiring the pot, then when someone polks back, it's not fair. It takes two or more to have a fight.

No wonder flags fly and members get banned...gee, what a shocking result.

Soon IMO, none of this will matter.....(:>)