Politics Forum Split
 

Currently there's a thread in politics asking whether or not the Politics forum should be split into two separate forums: Politics and Political Theory.

For those that don't go to Politics often, the majority of the threads there center around topics that would largely qualify as political theory, specifically the difference between the existence of a "state" and anarchy (both in society and the market).

Even Iron, Poly's mod, has lamented the lack of "conventional political discussion" in the forum, and very often threads that start out being about current political issues (the debates, 2008 election, social security, etc) are derailed with theoretical discussion, making an attempt at discussing current events largely impossible.

Splitting the forums would accomplish two major things. First, clarity of discussion in both forums. Neither forum, moderated properly, should be subject to any more derailed threads and protracted debates that amount to little more then ideological flame wars.
Secondly, Iron will be able to enforce the rules in Politics as they're currently written. Too often people that make obvious troll posts are almost immune from punishment because they can shield themselves behind the "extreme ideological" stance. Splitting the forums would allow him to properly enforce the rules.

Any Thoughts?

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

Why not just have OP's start threads with Theory: or Current: and moderate away replies that don't fit with the OP's intended thread.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why not just have OP's start threads with Theory: or Current: and moderate away replies that don't fit with the OP's intended thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Politics lives up to it's reputation as a particularly "heated" forum, and it's not that there is a lack of threads being started, it's that often those threads get hijacked and killed, regardless of the points of the OP. It's a little difficult to describe if you don't go to the Poly forum often, but labels seem unlikely to work.

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
Even Iron, Poly's mod, has lamented the lack of "conventional political discussion" in the forum, and very often threads that start out being about current political issues (the debates, 2008 election, social security, etc) are derailed with theoretical discussion, making an attempt at discussing current events largely impossible.


[/ QUOTE ]
I really don't see this at all. However if this is the case I've always voiced support behind sane anti-hijacking rules in the politics forum.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

If people don't respect threads now why do you think they'll respect forum boundaries?

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
If people don't respect threads now why do you think they'll respect forum boundaries?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd imagine the banhammer (and the ability to use it) would help some.

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Even Iron, Poly's mod, has lamented the lack of "conventional political discussion" in the forum, and very often threads that start out being about current political issues (the debates, 2008 election, social security, etc) are derailed with theoretical discussion, making an attempt at discussing current events largely impossible.


[/ QUOTE ]
I really don't see this at all. However if this is the case I've always voiced support behind sane anti-hijacking rules in the politics forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you kidding me shake?
How many threads about other issues are hijacked with Nielsio's "Are they're any jackbooted bearded people I can vote for" comments. And how many threads about current bills or house/senate debates get hit with "Well why don't we just scrap the whole thing".

I know the ACists love it, hell I enjoy those threads, but whenever anything current is brought up, it still falls right into "AC v. Statism" debates. Who knows how many posters we've lost because of that garbage, I should know, as I was one of them for a long while.

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
Are you kidding me shake?


[/ QUOTE ]
No.
[ QUOTE ]
How many threads about other issues are hijacked with Nielsio's "Are they're any jackbooted bearded people I can vote for" comments.

[/ QUOTE ]
I do see those some times, but it rarely hijacks discussion. However, I'm fine with making it against forum rules to do that.
[ QUOTE ]
And how many threads about current bills or house/senate debates get hit with "Well why don't we just scrap the whole thing".


[/ QUOTE ]
Whole thing meaning government, or the bill? I don't see much on government, and what's wrong with debating the merits of getting rid of law or being against a bill? ACism is just economic conservatism and social liberalism, should we bar both these views from a current events forum?
[ QUOTE ]
I know the ACists love it, hell I enjoy those threads, but whenever anything current is brought up, it still falls right into "AC v. Statism" debates.

[/ QUOTE ]
As I said, I don't notice this but if it is prevelant, make it against the rules. No need to split up an already low trafficed forum.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
I do see those some times, but it rarely hijacks discussion. However, I'm fine with making it against forum rules to do that.


[/ QUOTE ]

Good, but I don't see that happening. Also, I doubt Iron has the strength to keep up with all the bans he'd need to give out.

[ QUOTE ]
Whole thing meaning government, or the bill?

[/ QUOTE ]

Gov't obviously.

[ QUOTE ]
and what's wrong with debating the merits of getting rid of law or being against a bill?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok this is why I think you're leveling me. Of course there's nothing wrong there, that was the point.

[ QUOTE ]
ACism is just economic conservatism and social liberalism, should we bar both these views from a current events forum?

[/ QUOTE ]

Intellectual dishonesty. ACism is a dramatic shift in self-government. It's an "anti-government" not just a different point on the same line.

[ QUOTE ]
No need to split up an already low trafficed forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Chicken or Egg? Is the forum low traffic because of all the trolling, or is the trolling do to lack of multiple debates. I'd guess it's low traffic because few people want to engage in the kinds of discussions that go on in there now, and fewer still want to be harassed while doing so.

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
Good, but I don't see that happening. Also, I doubt Iron has the strength to keep up with all the bans he'd need to give out.


[/ QUOTE ]
Simply adjusting the forum rules is more likely then splitting the forum (splitting the forum has been discussed a lot in the past). If someone is hijckacking a thread, push the notify the mod button. The fact that it would be known to be against the rules alone would decrease hijackings.
[ QUOTE ]
Gov't obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]
OK, well I'm fine with making that against the rules
[ QUOTE ]
Intellectual dishonesty. ACism is a dramatic shift in self-government. It's an "anti-government" not just a different point on the same line.


[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, but what I'm saying is that it's perfectly fine for an ACist to argue against Social security for example without derailing the thread into a AC vs Statism debate (and even though I'm an ACist a hate it when it happens, because invariably the same arguments come up and it's the same people arguing it, so i'm fine with rules against this).
[ QUOTE ]
Chicken or Egg? Is the forum low traffic because of all the trolling, or is the trolling do to lack of multiple debates.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ive been posting in politics since my reg date, when the politics forum was much different (less AC discussion). At least over the last year and a half it's been low traffcked.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

do whatever you guys want, nobody else cares.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
do whatever you guys want, nobody else cares.

[/ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

I know deep down you really do care. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Seriously, I thought after the dethroning of Jman, RR, and [censored] we were keeping politics threads out of ATF and in politics. Maybe the honorable Mike Haven can fix this issue and ship this thread to the politics forum.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
do whatever you guys want, nobody else cares.

[/ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

I know deep down you really do care. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Seriously, I thought after the dethrowning of Jman, RR, and [censored] we were keeping politics threads out of ATF and in politics. Maybe the honorable Mike Haven can fix this issue and ship this thread to the politics forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

If anything, we should just roll this into the one that I linked in the OP. This is a perfect thread for ATF though, so I have no idea why we'd do that.

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

I rarely visit the politics forum anymore. To be fair, to properly engage in discussion in that forum takes more time than I'm willing to give. That said there is so much theory and abstraction that populates the forum that it is not particularly interesting to many who(such as myself now) may want to engage in political discussion of a more conventional nature. Frankly, it seems to have become Nielsio's Playground, where he can wax poetic about his latest conspiracy theory or anti-statism crusade. It and he are a crashing bore. I realize there is an ignore button, but the guy is evrywhere and I am sincere(without vitriol) in my contention that he has hurt that forum.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
Frankly, it seems to have become Nielsio's Playground, where he can wax poetic about his latest conspiracy theory or anti-statism crusade.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with what you wrote, and I'm thinking that your opinions are shared by many others. That said I don't think the above quote is entirely true. Niels is certainly loud and prolific with his posts/replies, but Iron has been on the case of stoping most of the "white noise" so it's not as if steps aren't being made to curb the problem. But yes, he's only able to intervene when it's a gross error.

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

How about this example:

Thread: "Who do you vote for in 2008"
OP: "Bush for a third term in 2008! Who's with me?"
Hijacking Bastard: "Who cares! They are all taxing thieves! Dur dur durrrrr"
Iron: BAN!!!

I'm pretty sure that this would make the politics forum a little more readable, if only because half the ACists would be banned within an hour.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

We allow political discussion in the Lounge btw, but I've locked them in the past if they get too much name-calling, not enough discussion. There's very little theory present usually.

A recent one was discussing whether America was ready for a female president, and a current one is should terrorism be called something else is no one is actually terrorised.

my 2c

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
How about this example:

Thread: "Who do you vote for in 2008"
OP: "Bush for a third term in 2008! Who's with me?"
Hijacking Bastard: "Who cares! They are all taxing thieves! Dur dur durrrrr"
Iron: BAN!!!

I'm pretty sure that this would make the politics forum a little more readable, if only because half the ACists would be banned within an hour.

[/ QUOTE ]
This type of insulting is exactly what the politics forum doesn't need. At least AndyFox simply says he doesn't want to read about AC theory and is not insulting toward it or the posters that talk about it. Try to have some class next time.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How about this example:

Thread: "Who do you vote for in 2008"
OP: "Bush for a third term in 2008! Who's with me?"
Hijacking Bastard: "Who cares! They are all taxing thieves! Dur dur durrrrr"
Iron: BAN!!!

I'm pretty sure that this would make the politics forum a little more readable, if only because half the ACists would be banned within an hour.

[/ QUOTE ]
This type of insulting is exactly what the politics forum doesn't need. At least AndyFox simply says he doesn't want to read about AC theory and is not insulting toward it or the posters that talk about it. Try to have some class next time.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not a matter of banning ACists (or by extention those that talk only of statism), it's being able to seperate what are essentially two different types of discussion.

Bitter: Did not know that.

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

so would this split render ATF as Politics Forum 3.0, or would you have Politics A and Politics B and ATF would continue as Politics 2.0?

this is my way of saying that gosh, we missed you guys.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

You politics guys wear your pants too tight, I suggest you loosen up, otherwise you'll have a heart attack before your glorious AC revolution comes to pass.

I haven't been to the politics forum in a while. It takes a lot of time to participate, and the constant AC hijacking makes it pretty unreadable. Maybe things have gotten better since I have been gone, but I doubt it.

A while ago, there was a debate in the Politics forum about whether there should, or should not, be an AC FAQ that is stickied in the front page. I thought it was a bad idea for the same reason creating a "Political Theory" forum is a bad idea. When you create a FAQ, or a whole forum, dedicated to AC, then you are legitimizing an extreme political ideology that very few people buy into.

I know you're going to come back with the "it's a political theory forum, not an AC forum", but we all know what it is that you want. The only political theory topics that come up are things like "How does gravity work under AC" or "Why can't I buy a Whopper without the STATE breathing down my back?". Any political theory topics that are not about AC, quickly degrade into arguments about AC. What you want is a forum dedicated completely to your wacky philosophy.

By splitting the forums, there would still be one unreadable forum with even more hijackings, and another forum with virtually no traffic. Personally, I think banning hijackers, that derail every single thread in politics, even if it's just for an hour, will put a quick stop to the mess that is the forum.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
When you create a FAQ, or a whole forum, dedicated to AC, then you are legitimizing an extreme political ideology that very few people buy into.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] XxGodJrXx

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
You politics guys wear your pants too tight, I suggest you loosen up, otherwise you'll have a heart attack before your glorious AC revolution comes to pass.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I have this condition where I get annoyed anytime someone acts like a pompous dick. Of course, I could just as easily tell you to loosen up and stop being so offended that people are discussing something you don't like and to stop trying to micromanage discussion.
[ QUOTE ]
A while ago, there was a debate in the Politics forum about whether there should, or should not, be an AC FAQ that is stickied in the front page. I thought it was a bad idea for the same reason creating a "Political Theory" forum is a bad idea. When you create a FAQ, or a whole forum, dedicated to AC, then you are legitimizing an extreme political ideology that very few people buy into.

[/ QUOTE ]
Like it or not discussion about ACism is what most politics posters like to do. With the exception of thread hijacking which I think should be enforced against, anyone that doesn't feel like discussing AC can avoid it.

The AC faq has decreased discussion about AC, which was it's intended purpose. Many people will put rendom questions about AC in threads, and Instead of hijacking a thread ACist can simply tell the person to read the part of the faq that addresses this question.
[ QUOTE ]
I know you're going to come back with the "it's a political theory forum, not an AC forum", but we all know what it is that you want. The only political theory topics that come up are things like "How does gravity work under AC" or "Why can't I buy a Whopper without the STATE breathing down my back?".

[/ QUOTE ]
Any theory posts are welcomed. There happens to be mostly AC theory posts because a disproportionately large amount of people want to discuss the theory.
[ QUOTE ]
Any political theory topics that are not about AC, quickly degrade into arguments about AC.

-childish insult snipped-


[/ QUOTE ]
I await your evidence of ACists doing this.
[ QUOTE ]
I think banning hijackers, that derail every single thread in politics, even if it's just for an hour, will put a quick stop to the mess that is the forum.

[/ QUOTE ]
Good, we agree.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When you create a FAQ, or a whole forum, dedicated to AC, then you are legitimizing an extreme political ideology that very few people buy into.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] XxGodJrXx

[/ QUOTE ]
I await your response in the other AtF thread.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
...No need to split up an already low trafficed forum...

[/ QUOTE ]

Shake, Can you please define "low trafficed" for me?

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

Since you say that AC discussion has gone down, and therefore, political theory discussion has gone down in general (since it is what most politics forum posters want to talk about), then we must agree that a Political Theory forum is not necessary. After all, Politics is already one of the lowest trafficked forums in 2+2, and with a decrease in Political Theory discussion, a separate forum to address issues that less people are talking about (according to you), must not be necessary.

P.S. Stop being so pretentious and hostile all the time, you are part of the reason that Politics is unreadable.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
this is my way of saying that gosh, we missed you guys.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I break a rule (written or un) by posting this here. As I said, I took a long break from poly so if I missed something hopefully the mods will lock/delete.

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
Since you say that AC discussion has gone down, and therefore, political theory discussion has gone down in general (since it is what most politics forum posters want to talk about), then we must agree that a Political Theory forum is not necessary. After all, Politics is already one of the lowest trafficked forums in 2+2, and with a decrease in Political Theory discussion, a separate forum to address issues that less people are talking about (according to you), must not be necessary.

P.S. Stop being so pretentious and hostile all the time, you are part of the reason that Politics is unreadable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Xx,
I think you might be confused here. Shake isn't wanting a split, I was. I'm not an ACist.

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
Since you say that AC discussion has gone down, and therefore, political theory discussion has gone down in general (since it is what most politics forum posters want to talk about), then we must agree that a Political Theory forum is not necessary. After all, Politics is already one of the lowest trafficked forums in 2+2, and with a decrease in Political Theory discussion, a separate forum to address issues that less people are talking about (according to you), must not be necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with you.
[ QUOTE ]
P.S. Stop being so pretentious and hostile all the time, you are part of the reason that Politics is unreadable.

[/ QUOTE ]
You insult a group of people of which I am a part of and I'm the hostile one? Give me a break.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any political theory topics that are not about AC, quickly degrade into arguments about AC.

-childish insult snipped-



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I await your evidence of ACists doing this.


[/ QUOTE ]

Shake, please take this kind of thing to LoL. I'd guess that in the past year almost 1 in every 2 threads are hijacked in some way. That mega-thread PVN and I contributed to was fine, it was entitled "Reactions to AC" so you'd expect some AC/state debate in there, but Nielsio's "Jackbooted thug" hijacks, his posts that don't serve as anything but JFK conspiracy and yet another attempt to say his tag-line "The [censored]'s going down", and people coming into threads that are about current political events attempting to start an AC debate are cluttering a forum that doesn't need them.

Cody

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

I am not insulting any group.. Most of the people that post in politics, including the AC crowd, are alright. Borodog, pvn, and Richard Tanner all contribute to the forum, and are civil in their discourse. Also, I am not personally that hostile towards AC ideas, nor am I against Political theory discussions. I consider myself a Libertarian, and have a BA in Political Science , where I tried to take as many Theory classes as possible (though my school did not have a wide variety of such courses). It is the flooding of the forum with AC, and the hijackings, which make me hostile towards the people that refuse to allow other discussion to occur on the forum.

I apparently misread your opinion about splitting up the forums, for that I apologize.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

I would like to see a "Political Events" forum, but I don't see the interest there. There are plenty of other websites that people who are interested in discussing politics can go to, so it's not a big loss.

If you look at the threads in politics, about 80% are "political theory" (i.e. AC). The remaining threads (those related to political events) don't usually get many responses unless they are hijacked by ACists.

I guess the question is: are there a large number of members who would like to post about current events, but completely avoid the Politics forum because of all the AC stuff? That's the only way there would be enough traffic to merit a new forum.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

I don't understand why you guys keep calling it a "slow" forum. Looking at Sniper's numbers, it's in step with B&M, which is a forum I lurk that I don't consider slow at all. However, I certainly think any split - even if it increased the combined traffic of the two - would result in two pretty slow forums. The upcoming election year could be a factor that boosts traffic sufficiently though. Dunno.

Anyway, do any of you guys like each other? Like, have you ever sought each other out when you're in the same city? I mean, there's a lot of acrimony in OOT and Sports, which are the two forums I probably visit the most, but I see it as more of a family squabble and I basically like most of the people who contribute, even if I disagree from time to time. That said, it seems like you all pretty much can't stand each other. I understand the weight of your discussions probably contributes to this, but it also seems unhealthy to frequent a forum that causes you such stress. Maybe I'm not seeing things right.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
I guess the question is: are there a large number of members who would like to post about current events, but completely avoid the Politics forum because of all the AC stuff? That's the only way there would be enough traffic to merit a new forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, this was my thinking. I would guess that there are plenty of lurkers that are scared off by the tone of Poly, but would be willing to contribute to a more laid back Red v. Blue debate. Now whether or not Red v. Blue would be more civil the AC v. State is anyones guess, but I would think that moderation is the key there.

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
I guess the question is: are there a large number of members who would like to post about current events, but completely avoid the Politics forum because of all the AC stuff? That's the only way there would be enough traffic to merit a new forum.

[/ QUOTE ]


I would really like to encourage more Current Events topics in the Lounge forum.

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, do any of you guys like each other? Like, have you ever sought each other out when you're in the same city? I mean, there's a lot of acrimony in OOT and Sports, which are the two forums I probably visit the most, but I see it as more of a family squabble and I basically like most of the people who contribute, even if I disagree from time to time. That said, it seems like you all pretty much can't stand each other. I understand the weight of your discussions probably contributes to this, but it also seems unhealthy to frequent a forum that causes you such stress. Maybe I'm not seeing things right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tough call and obviously differs by individual. I'll try to answer both parts.

First, Poly is a little different then Sports (where I lurk alot and post about NFL season). In sports, Edge, Noodle, and Myself are Colts fans, and there are plenty of Pats fans to balance us out. We always argue back and forth, but it's mostly in good fun, and we know the games between the two are normally instant classics, so it's all good.

Politics is a little different, you're very often bringing up questions that conflict or unsettle people's deepest beliefs. Because of this, the threads that generate the most interest often invoke the strongest feelings, and often some portion of those feelings are getting hurt. So yes, there is some stress involved, but I think that's part of what you sign up for in political discourse. You just have to try not to take it personally.

As for the second part, I like to think of myself as one of the more pragmatic members of the board. I'm always looking for compromise, both idologically and practically. I'd love to meet some of the guys (girls? I honestly don't know) from Poly in real life.
There are some who I'd be less then keen to meet, but in general I can't think of anyone with whom I'd not want to meet in person.

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I guess the question is: are there a large number of members who would like to post about current events, but completely avoid the Politics forum because of all the AC stuff? That's the only way there would be enough traffic to merit a new forum.

[/ QUOTE ]


I would really like to encourage more Current Events topics in the Lounge forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just so we're clear, you're talking about political current events (debates, possible scandals, etc) right? I suppose if you and Carter are willing to allow things like that in your house then it could be a sort of test run as to how much interest is truely present on the topic.

Cody

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

this 'split' idea sucks


I don't like the scary theory...make them stop...
they won't stop....i'm leaving...

waaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhh
waaaaaaahhhh
wahhhhhhhhh

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

What about this as an analogy, what if every time you posted a poker hand question

"KK gets check raised on a scary flop, what's my play"

50 people responded

"Poker is gambling and gambling is evil and should be stopped"

and the whole thread got derailed into a "gambling is bad" argument? Wouldn't that get annoying?

Re: Politics Forum Split
 

[ QUOTE ]
this 'split' idea sucks


I don't like the scary theory...make them stop...
they won't stop....i'm leaving...

waaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhh
waaaaaaahhhh
wahhhhhhhhh

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you spent any time in Poly? That's not at all what's going on. Read that post below yours for a much better description.

Cody