THis felt pertinant. Especially noting the [flagged] status: > Indeed, one consistent feedback I’ve heard from a subset of readers here is something to this ef

THis felt pertinant. Especially noting the [flagged] status: > Indeed, one consistent feedback I’ve heard from a subset of readers here is something to this effect: “I used to like reading your stuff more when you weren’t writing about politics all the time.” > My response to that is: “Yeah, me too.” It’s not that I’m suddenly interested in writing about political matters; it’s that various actions by this administration keep intruding on my areas of coverage. > A less charitable interpretation of that reader comment is that anyone still giving such feedback is either dangerously uninformed, being disingenuous, or just doesn’t want to keep being reminded that they’re on the side of the villains, despite all the evidence showing it. I don't want to go full throttle on this, but I think the mostly neutral stance being taken historically over flagging and un-flagging is going to be a semi constant irritation now that there is active warfare to "capture the flag(ging)" going on. I suppose I could be told "always thus" but I do think there's a qualitative difference emerging to past practice. The difference is, if you critique Musk/Doge you get flagged. It's almost robotic. It's strongly suggestive of a coded solution. I don't think we always had that.