This software, unlike the old software, can create something callled a sub-topic.  Basically, If you click on the 2000's board, at the top of the main thread listing, you'll see a link for another board on the same topic.  I'm proposing that issues that are highly chraged poltical issues (abortion, Iraq, the president, etc) get a seperate topic so that the main board more closely reflects the other decade boards.

I say leave them all together politcs is a major part of current events anyway.

That be cool, but if you do it for this.  Why not do it for the other boards?  90's, 80's, 70's etc..

Having a separate board for politics is unnecessary. And it takes too much web space as it is. Keep it where it is. :)

I say move politics, etc

Sure.  It's kinda lame when you see the front page of the board clogged with these threads.

I say yes.  I'd rather have a place for controversy than have controversy creep up on those who don't wish to engage.  If a thread becomes politically charged, the moderators can move the thread instead of deleting it.
That said, there are some people who need to understand the difference between debating and bomb-throwing.  I use some spicy language in may posts, but I restrict my passions to topics, not to individuals. 

I don't want to slip into controversy here, but there's a style of political discourse popularized by Rush Limbaugh that is based on personal attacks and low-blows.  I don't say this because I disagree with Rush and Rush-alikes, I say it because ridicule is their modus operandus.  "Ridicule is a great thing," I once heard Rush say.
William F. Buckley, founder of the National Review, has been a prominant voice in the Libertarian/Conservative movement since the '50s.  His debate is cogent and factual, and he's always a gentleman.  He was the host of Firing Line on PBS, the granddaddy of all political shout shows.  However, he used true debate.  Persuasion is a skill.  What the Limbaughs and Hannitys do would get you a failing grade in a high school debate society.  They attack and destroy.  They begin with the prejudice that one value is superior to another, and in the end dismiss dissenters as "bleeding heart liberals," "tax-and-spend Democrats," "Clinton Kool-Aid Drinkers," or some such epithet.  Facts and logic don't matter.  Prejudice and gut reactions do.

For any political sub-category, I think we should say, "No Rush."  That is, unless you call yourself  "Rush"!

I say yes.  I'd rather have a place for controversy than have controversy creep up on those who don't wish to engage.  If a thread becomes politically charged, the moderators can move the thread instead of deleting it.
That said, there are some people who need to understand the difference between debating and bomb-throwing.  I use some spicy language in may posts, but I restrict my passions to topics, not to individuals. 


that is currently the rule (no personal attacks) and will remain so even if the new board is created.  I'm letting this voting poll run 10 days (I think).  At that point, I'll unsticky it and make the board if that's the case.

I voted undecided. 2000 politics is 2000 but I can see why people would want to place these political issues somewhere else.

I don't want to slip into controversy here, but there's a style of political discourse popularized by Rush Limbaugh that is based on personal attacks and low-blows.  I don't say this because I disagree with Rush and Rush-alikes, I say it because ridicule is their modus operandus.  "Ridicule is a great thing," I once heard Rush say.
William F. Buckley, founder of the National Review, has been a prominant voice in the Libertarian/Conservative movement since the '50s.  His debate is cogent and factual, and he's always a gentleman.  He was the host of Firing Line on PBS, the granddaddy of all political shout shows.  However, he used true debate.  Persuasion is a skill.  What the Limbaughs and Hannitys do would get you a failing grade in a high school debate society.  They attack and destroy.  They begin with the prejudice that one value is superior to another, and in the end dismiss dissenters as "bleeding heart liberals," "tax-and-spend Democrats," "Clinton Kool-Aid Drinkers," or some such epithet.  Facts and logic don't matter.  Prejudice and gut reactions do.

For any political sub-category, I think we should say, "No Rush."  That is, unless you call yourself  "Rush"!


I think that entire statement solidifies exactly why so many are fed up with politics on this board.

It was a simple yes/no question, yet again, politics has found its way into the thread as it has in virtually everythread here lately.  Where did the Rush/Hannity thing come from? ::)  Its all become a broken record, not to mention verrrry tired and old!




I say yes, make a new politics board for those who seem to not be able to hold themselves back from making every thread into a political statement, and in effect, ruining those threads.

I also think it is a good idea.  Then those who don't like the political threads won't accidentally stumble upon one.  Or when others have the days they don't even want to see the topic they don't have to.

I think that entire statement solidifies exactly why so many are fed up with politics on this board.

It was a simple yes/no question, yet again, politics has found its way into the thread as it has in virtually everythread here lately.  Where did the Rush/Hannity thing come from? ::)  Its all become a broken record, not to mention verrrry tired and old!

I say yes, make a new politics board for those who seem to not be able to hold themselves back from making every thread into a political statement, and in effect, ruining those threads.

I brought those names up because they are the most familiar.  They represent the rhetorical style I have seen at play on this board.  It is not debate, it is dogma.  I say yes to "debate," and no to "dogma."  There are some people who need to learn the difference.  That's all.

I would like that separated-like radio shows- you know where to go for whatever style/format you're looking for or you'llhave to flash past too many subjects for the 2000's unti you find something NOT political.

However, the micro manager in me thinks it will be the editors chore to determine if the subject of something heard on the radio and commented on is political or  opinion..if there is an even that took place and someone writes in to say I knew "so&so" was wrong..that is another call of politicalor not.

* a political site would be easier to deal with when someone wants to write "Go Bush"! All they'd like...and debate things heard on a totallly separate site.

You've got a general site for all else 2000's for the fun stuff.

saver 

Yes! The 2000's can be labeled "2,000's Non-Political" and "2000's Political"

Don't like the idea at all.  If you see a political topic you don't have to click on it.  If you see a political post you don't have to read it.  I just don't like the idea of relegating all political topics to a separate page.  Where does it stop, y'knowwhamean?  Why not have separate topics on music, movies, blahdyblah?  I think the divisions we have are enough.

If you see a political topic you don't have to click on it.  If you see a political post you don't have to read it. 

I completely agree, however, it has become a trend lately by some that politics are being inserted into otherwise non-political threads and topics on a regular basis.

Take this thread for example...(a few posts back)

Or, just have a separate "Politics and Debates" section.


Great idea.

I know that I don't post much in the 2000s board anymore but thats because of all the political threads. I think there should be a sub topic for politics and debates. I know that a lot of what the 2000s are about is politics, but thats not everything. There are so many other things to talk about that happen today that have entirely nothing to do with politics, but I won't post on threads that are made up about them because I will never see them, seeing as how the political threads usually multiply when you throw water on them! j/k! ;)

Seriously, it would be a good idea simply because the 2000s board is becoming so unlike the other decades boards, it feels almost like walking through a minefield when I do post here because I know that politics leaks into every thread on this board. It would just be good to see the 2000s board be about the 2000s, not politics in the 2000s.

Rio

Don't like the idea at all.  If you see a political topic you don't have to click on it.  If you see a political post you don't have to read it.  I just don't like the idea of relegating all political topics to a separate page.  Where does it stop, y'knowwhamean?  Why not have separate topics on music, movies, blahdyblah?  I think the divisions we have are enough.


I agree. I voted no myself. However, there are people out there in the world of messageboards and in these forums who cannot seem to learn the essential skill of ignoring threads and posts. :-\\

It's a shame it has come to this.

I completely agree, however, it has become a trend lately by some that politics are being inserted into otherwise non-political threads and topics on a regular basis.

Take this thread for example...(a few posts back)


This is the problem with message boards in general, and making a separate area for political threads (and religious ones too, considering how often that is brought up) would be defeated because you would still find political posts cropping up in otherwise non-political threads. We all know by now that there's a percentage of posters on boards who either don't know the rules or choose to ignore them. Opening a separate sub-heading for political threads won't stop this.

This is the problem with message boards in general, and making a separate area for political threads (and religious ones too, considering how often that is brought up) would be defeated because you would still find political posts cropping up in otherwise non-political threads. We all know by now that there's a percentage of posters on boards who either don't know the rules or choose to ignore them. Opening a separate sub-heading for political threads won't stop this.


no, but that's what moderators are for... off topic is still off topic, and subject to be moved or deleted.

As much as it gives certain people a righteous kick to hold forth in political threads, it gives others the same kind of righteous kick to scorn political threads.

No, I think they should be left as is.  If the post don't interest you, just don't open it.  Like other people have said, if it's done for one topic, eventually it will have to be done for all, 70's, 80's etc.

I'm undecided.  It doesn't bother me, either way is fine.  If I don't wanna read something like a political thread I just bypass it anyway.

Why not start a separate boards for music, movies, other websites, books, groups, gripes, grapes, grips?  How many other topics do we need?

No.  The political topics are clearly marked.  Some people say ''well it was to tempting, I had to view it.''  Well wouldn't it be to tempting even with a seperate but equal political topic?

I closed voting a little earlier.  The majority appear to want a sub-board, and I think it'll make things a little more orderly.  I also threw politics in there, since that appears to be something people can't discuss appropriately either.

No.  The political topics are clearly marked.  Some people say ''well it was to tempting, I had to view it.''  Well wouldn't it be to tempting even with a seperate but equal political topic?


Not all topics are clearly identified by their titles unfortunately.  I realized this as I tried to move all the appropriate topics to the new board.  Most are, but some aren't.

:(  Pie chart doesn't seem to be working...

Or, just have a separate "Politics and Debates" section.


Yea, but what will we do then if we debate something like "The best muician of the decade"?  That will be a debate, but not political.

I know, am nit-picking here, but it is a point.  ANd besides, what if my choice is "Presidents Of The United States" or "Dead Kennedy's", is that political?

:D