Sounds good, but in wrong place. That debate was ignited by this very unhappy comment:
Poor Scott512, I doubt he anticipated what will happen.
But, the idea was expressed literally: Zhenya got Russia to the Olympics. And, as it is really a huge overstatement of the real impact of that speech on the decision, someone other expressed it. Which is fair and square, it is not bashing anyone and no, it is definitely not trolling, because then, you could call any disagreement with something that is simply, well, not true, as a trolling. So, those who expressed disagreement did not brought that topic here at all and in the same time they did not say anything wrong just by pointing on that it had no such impact.
The fact that she did participate should be pointed e. g. when someone calls her a traitor of Russia or something like that. It is easy to remind such person: "Do you realize that Zhenya attempted what she could for russian presence at the olympics? She honestly and bravely defended her country in front of IOC."
While stating "she got Russia in the Olympics" is an exaggeration. One could then say e. g. that because Alina succesfully went through doping test before the competition, it stripped russian athletes from all suspisions." That would be again ascribing the importance that it does not have.
This is IMO, how people should look at it, pure racional view, not emotional, without need to bash or the opposite to defend against non-existent attack. One thesis was expressed, against it is counterargument that is not attacking anyone, just explaining why the original thesis is wrong and that's all. No need to labelling opposite sides with "troll" label and all. Just ease everybody a little.
