Going back to the political thread?

[Dale]

I'm calling another advisory vote.

[OnTheMoor]

Any chance on compromising and creating another mega-thread?
Religion/Philosophy
Politics/Bush Bashing

[jsluder]

Any chance on compromising and creating another mega-thread?
Religion/Philosophy
Politics/Bush Bashing

But then how would you handle the "religion in politics" discussions?

I'm torn on the mega-thread issue. A single thread for all political and religious discussion gets hard to follow, especially when there are several different topics being discussed simultaneously. On the other hand, these topics sometimes seem like they're going to overwhelm the forum, mainly because they often degenerate in to pointless yelling. (But there is often a lot of good information and wisdom posted, too.) I guess I'd prefer to see them stay "free", but with the understanding that no one should be surprised or offended if a thread gets locked or deleted.

[The Weekenders]

Even though more people agree with a vigorous dislike of the current President than not, I still think that a daily "talking point" against Bush and the Admin, especially when "disguised" as a poll makes this a less friendly place. When this happened before (10 Reasons Bush is Like Hitler), the poster basically opted out for greener blogging and activist website pastures. There seem to be so many places you can blog and blather for any political side, why should the forum be transformed into just another one?

The fact that the moderator and founder of this site is asking the question should be proof enough that things are out of kilter.

[Denny]

I'm with Sluder.

The times are just too interesting.

[OnTheMoor]

How about a new political policy like the commercial one? "One political thread per month!" Seriously though. A monthly political round-up.

[SteveShaw]

I'd leave things as they are, mate. This is a pretty good-tempered board - a shining example I'd say. You're always going to get threads starting up which are of a somewhat "marginal" nature but I reckon that 99.9% of the people around here have faith in your "weather eye." And for heaven's sake one doesn't have to wade in on what one might regard as unpleasant topics if one doesn't want to. In any case, it's a bit hard to define "political..."

All the best

Steve

[peeplj]

I'm another vote for leaving things as they are.

We live in troubled times; political and religious threads are a natural side-effect of those times.

The real challenge isn't to reduce the number of potentially offensive threads--it's to find a way to help make these troubled times better.

--James

[gonzo914]

I voted to keep it as it is. I don't think they are all that excessive. There are, what, 45 to 50 threads on a page, and of the ones on the front page, maybe five are political (not counting the Walken for pres thread or this one) and a couple that look religious. What's that? 15 percent? The rest are about scotch and computers and irritating tunes and Crisco and science, plus a couple of requiems and whatever those 2nd, 3rd and 4th tests are. It's a glorious assortment of things to do instead of work.

Just like a real pub, but without the last call.

[Cynth]

I can always tell when a thread has a political topic. If I don't like the topic then I just go to a different thread. Some things start out non-political and then develop into a political discussion just sort of naturally. It would cause a lot of confusion then about what to do if that happens. Or someone may have a relevant political sort of comment on something and it wouldn't be good for them to have to with hold it. I really hate politics, but I like everybody having the maximum amount of freedom possible. I pick and choose among the threads anyway, so I can't see where it's any skin off my nose if some of the threads are political.

[jGilder]

I was busy and didn't get to vote in the poll. And most of my views have already been posted by others. I will say that the degeneration at the end of political threads referred to by one or two people isn't really an issue anymore. Brianc has opted out and those of us that are left seem to have tempered our dispositions. None of us are perfect -- so why expect the board to be? Also, I don't think the mega threads work very well -- it's like forcing the people that want to talk politics into a broom closet.

[missy]

be free ..... be free......

seriously - I find the "mega" thread can be quite confusing if a lot of posts start happening quickly. Especially when multiple subjects are being discussed.

[mvhplank]

I voted to start new threads. I'm not interested in all things political. And extra-long threads make my head spin. I don't even stop into the Cutie Pie thread any more. Shorter, more focused threads are easier to dip into and out of.

Isn't that what the Pub's for? All things non-whistle?

If the title states clearly enough what the topic is, I can either read it or avoid it. And if it doesn't, my browser indicates the ones I've read.

Don't sweat it, Dale. As long as the language is polite (or at least not obscene), it gives folks a needed outlet.

M

[Wombat]

Leave well alone, I think. Whether or not I involve myself in political or religious threads depends on how busy I am mainly. But when I don't involve myself, as at present, it's no problem bypassing them. If someone attracted to them can bypass them, why would someone not even interested have a problem? I don't get it. I mean I really don't get it.

[Dale]

Thanks to all. I appreciate your counsel.