Politics Forum Split

[jman220]

Another Idea is just having one thread that all the Acists could post in to their hearts delight (since politics is such a low traffic forum afterall), and freeing up the rest of the forum for discussion of current political events that is actually interesting. Just an idea though.

[tomdemaine]

If we;re making bad poker analogies it's more like

Red : 47os is best from early position

Blue : no dummy 52o is far superior

AC : How about you play neither and wait for premium cards

Both : Ha wait for premium cards yeah that's such a utopian idea of course it'll never work in reality. I'd like to know the exact way to play AA in every position at 6 max heads up and full ring tables facing every conceivable type of opponent before I even think about this so called premium card strategy.

Troll : Here's an example of where I played KK on lost so the premium card startegy can obviously never work.

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
It takes a lot of time to participate, and the constant AC hijacking makes it pretty unreadable.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]


You yourself started a thread about AC. In this thread you become obtuse to the point where you demand clarification on the word "do".

Then you come here and complain about all the AC threads and the unreadability of the board.

Also I can't remember seeing you before on the Politics board, and then you come here saying things as though you are a regular and your opinion should be weighed strongly because of your integrity and honesty.

This seems incredibly disingenuous and hypocritical to me.

[Nielsio]

[ 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 ]


Can you give an example and elaborate thoroughly on how you would like to see things differently?

It's a little too easy to make such a generalized assertion.

[katyseagull]

[ QUOTE ]
[ 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

[/ QUOTE ]


Cody,

Yes, as diebitter stated we do allow political threads in the Lounge. Threads covering the debates and possible scandals seem like fine topics to me as long as the OP is not stupid. Personally I'm interested in other people's views on the debates and candidates. I have a bunch of questions.

All we ask in the lounge is that our forum members be courteous and respectful towards each other.

Posts of this nature

[ QUOTE ]
waaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhh
waaaaaaahhhh
wahhhhhhhhh

[/ QUOTE ]


would be, well, kind of frowned on [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img].

[AlexM]

[ 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 ]

Me too.

[AlexM]

[ 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 ]

Almost no ACists do that. It has been demonstrated multiple times in the past that most "AC hijacks" of non-AC threads occur because of non-ACists randomly attacking AC in the thred.

[AlexM]

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

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhm... he's responding to your pretentiousness and hostility. He's not the one demonstrating these qualities.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
Another Idea is just having one thread that all the Acists could post in to their hearts delight (since politics is such a low traffic forum afterall), and freeing up the rest of the forum for discussion of current political events that is actually interesting to me. Just an idea though.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

Seriously, it's obvious that the majority of posters in Politics do find the AC discussions interesting, which is why they continue. The fact that you don't and let your biases influence your decision making about it with ideas like this "single thread" idea is why you were a poor mod (for Politics anyway). Iron does better because although he doesn't particularly care for the AC discussion so much either, he understands that most of the people there want it and so he doesn't try to interefere mostly.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
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?

[/ QUOTE ]
Again...

Almost no ACists do that. It has been demonstrated multiple times in the past that most "AC hijacks" of non-AC threads occur because of non-ACists randomly attacking AC in the thread.