Having been through the wars in the NW/DL forum merger and been disgusted by it, I would like the mods to explicitly warn against certain inflammatory terms. They might not sound inflammatory taken out of context, but trust me, they quickly turned into hot-buttons.

Kool-Aid (and especially here, COol-Aid)

Loyalist

Apologist

There are more, but you get the idea. FTer A decides that FTer B is a "CO Loyalist" just because B doesn't agree that UA is evil.

FTer C calls FTer A a "CO apologist".

These terms polarize the forums. They become akin to political attack ads. In reality, FTer B might think that a lot of what UA has isn't as good as what CO has, and hopes NewUA uses a mix. But because FTer B isn't changing her/his signature to include links to anti-merger websites and doesn't condemn every single thing UA brings to the table, FTer B gets labeled as drinking the UA Kool-Aid.

Posters without a lot of enthusiasm for having arguments who don't follow every post by A, B, and C, may get unbalanced views of the participants and their POVs due to this labeling.

Trust me. I was one of the people who became FTer B over in the DL/NW wars, which really turned me off to FT entirely for a time.

I'd like to think we can discuss the pros and cons of each airline that are coming together, without having to pigeonhole each other into artificial political parties.