I’m commenting this in a new thread in order to avoid noise in Julia from the perspective of a pythonista, which is the origin of my comment. (EDIT: Oh, I see that the original thread has been closed, but anyway I hope that this commentary on the side topic is still pertinent.)
I support the reasonable use of the “Slow down mode” of Discourse, which in my opinion can contribute to healthier and less biased discussions. In response to @dariush-bahrami’s objection in the other discussion, I would say that it is not a matter of distrust in the participants’ maturity, but of favoring the diversity of voices in hot topics, before they degenerate into long dialogues with a very narrow scope between a few persons.
I don’t feel like looking for examples, but I recall several threads that started with very polite, judicious and constructive commentaries like the first post of the cited conversation, and eventually became an exchange of one-to-one accusations in the shape of “You are a troll!” vs. “This is such a narrow-minded, self-satisfied community!”. I believe that in most cases that was a rude misrepresentation of the intent and manners of both sides, although it’s easy to see how the later development of the discussion might lead to such perception.
Enforced pauses do not censor anyone’s point, but give others the opportunity to share their vision on the topic – or also mediate if they catch others’ commentaries that can distort the conversation; and that may help to represent the thoughts of the community in a fairer way. So thank you for trying that tool; I do think it can be useful if it is used judiciously.