Separate Forum for Intellectual Topics/Discussion POLL

[Phatscotty]

Concise description:
a subforum for politics, economics, philosophy, religion etc where people are encoruaged to stay on topic.

Specifics/Details:
People who are looking for fun and laughs can go one way, people who want to connect with other like minded individuals for serious discussion can go another way.


How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
It can tone down a lot of negativity and make for more harmonious discussions without all the tomfoolery.

[Metsfanmax]

Wouldn't it make more sense to create a separate forum for anti-intellectual topics/discussions?

[BigBallinStalin]

Imagine PhatSoctty all alone in his forum arguing about fiscal policy. It would be great!

As long as OT is not affected by this suggestion, then I support it. There's some chance of lulz to be had.

[thegreekdog]

Imagine PhatSoctty all alone in his forum arguing about fiscal policy. It would be great!

As long as OT is not affected by this suggestion, then I support it. There's some chance of lulz to be had.

I don't think we should limit it to fiscal policy, which is the only topic in which Phatscotty is interested. I think it needs to be all types of intellectual discussions.

[daddy1gringo]

Wouldn't it make more sense to create a separate forum for anti-intellectual topics/discussions?

Either.

[notyou2]

Phatty's very own playpen!!!! I approve.

Can we make a playpen for everyone else and call it " No Phatty Allowed"?

[AndyDufresne]

Wouldn't it make more sense to create a separate forum for anti-intellectual topics/discussions?

Either.

Some of the most anti-intellectual conversations are the most intellectual! Let a free market in america decide.


--Andy

[BigBallinStalin]

Wouldn't it make more sense to create a separate forum for anti-intellectual topics/discussions?

Either.

Some of the most anti-intellectual conversations are the most intellectual! Let a free market in america decide.


--Andy

But what about the costs to CC for creating this forum? Will they have to increase fees and spend more resources to monitor this new forum? What about the CC debt limit and deficit spending? We can't have a stable and free society if we make forums whenever we please!

[mrswdk]

Is an electronic forum a permanent enough place for Phats to record his various musings on the human condition? Perhaps CC should arrange for some stone tablets to be delivered to his address.

[universalchiro]

Concise description:
a subforum for politics, economics, philosophy, religion etc where people are encoruaged to stay on topic.

Specifics/Details:
People who are looking for fun and laughs can go one way, people who want to connect with other like minded individuals for serious discussion can go another way.


How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
It can tone down a lot of negativity and make for more harmonious discussions without all the tomfoolery and childishness.

This is so spot on. I have noticed a few repeat posters in threads that only have an agenda of derailing a topic. Consistently all these derailers do is change the subject or try to be funny. And their end result is takes away the enjoyment of communicating on a serious adult level. Their constant one liners, and pictures of bananas that have nothing to do with the topic is really childish. I have even read "We've sufficiently derailed this topic. Well played other participants." by a frequent derailer.

This suggestion by Phatscotty is a breath of fresh air.

[Phatscotty]

Here's my piece. I think there is a lot of opportunity here to learn from other people all around the world, and some do, but I think there is a lot of room for improvement. Sometimes people might want to know what is really going on in somewhere in China and would like to hear from someone in China. Maybe it's Detroit. Maybe it's health care reform here compared to HC reform somewhere else. We have a pretty good group here and highly intelligent and diverse at that. Nothing against the lulz, but it would be sweet to have this separation. Contrary to how this issue is being framed, the idea has been suggested for years. It may not be the best idea, it may be turned down again, but I have noticed a 'breath of fresh air' throughout the site the last few months. Just giving it another try.

Our community has the bingo hall (forum games)
Our community has the juvenile detention center (OT)
Our community could benefit greatly IMO from a gentleman's club (The Star Chamber)

[thegreekdog]

universalchiro and PS...

To be perfectly frank, honest, and serious for a second, you are either both willfully ignorant or just ignorant. There are many threads discussing intellectual issues that are both enlightening and entertaining in OT. I give you the following example which I can only assume three people have read (me, BBS, and Mets).

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=93718&start=6165#p4415432

Start there and read. If you don't find it intellectually stimulating with precisely the sort of topics that Phatscotty cares about (he created the thread, after all), then your threads in the Star Chamber won't work.

[AndyDufresne]

PS and universalchiro -- Go examine the last 5 pages of the Off Topics forum. Can you make a list of which topics would be where? I am curious to see your division, with real concrete examples from the most recent Off Topics posts.


--Andy

[Metsfanmax]

Their constant one liners, and pictures of bananas that have nothing to do with the topic is really childish.

If you want us to ban Andy, you're going to need a separate thread for that.

[Phatscotty]

Thing is, I already know who will band together against this. Maybe some other people have input as well. I know there are lots of lurkers on the site who would like to participate (I know more than a handful) in that section of the forum, but they don't, because they easily lose their temper or are afraid or they are above or turned off by or think they will get laughed at and teased about one of the two subjects in the issue. They might want to get giggles but don't because they hate politics and religion, or they might want to go see what someone is saying on politics and religion and what is being shared on the topic, but don't want to scan through 5 pages of lulzers to find the next on topic serious post. I think where it may just be best for some people to easily skip over one topic or another, many times the temptation is too irresistible, and before they know it they are seeing red and saying things they don't mean to say or changing the purpose for their participation in the thread.

I don't think anyone should be banned, or anyone should be reported, but it would make it easier for people to get what they came for. Just a suggestion

[Phatscotty]

universalchiro and PS...

To be perfectly frank, honest, and serious for a second, you are either both willfully ignorant or just ignorant. There are many threads discussing intellectual issues that are both enlightening and entertaining in OT. I give you the following example which I can only assume three people have read (me, BBS, and Mets).

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=93718&start=6165#p4415432

Start there and read. If you don't find it intellectually stimulating with precisely the sort of topics that Phatscotty cares about (he created the thread, after all), then your threads in the Star Chamber won't work.

Yes, I saw that BBS and Mets have been working very, very hard indeed. I have noticed over the years, every time somebody is crossing the line, they hurry up and make a serious post and showcase their value to the community. Not saying that's what's going on there, but I am saying for the reasons recently posted many people have long ago stopped clicking on the Obamacare thread to find any real information or conversation, and if those people clicked today they would probably be surprised at the recent couple days of discussions there.

[Metsfanmax]

But how would we even police such a forum? How would we know what counts as a sufficiently serious reply to not count as derailing it?

[Phatscotty]

But how would we even police such a forum? How would we know what counts as a sufficiently serious reply to not count as derailing it?

Why would we have to police it? One of the ideas, but by no means at all the only idea, is simply people who might normally need policing would not as often even be in the position. Derailing specifically? I don't know, I've never let them derail against me. Sure they have tried and wasted a lot of hours and countless pages of nothingness. It's not easy to beat them every single time, but I'm not everyone.

[notyou2]

Here's my piece. I think there is a lot of opportunity here to learn from other people all around the world, and some do, but I think there is a lot of room for improvement. Sometimes people might want to know what is really going on in somewhere in China and would like to hear from someone in China. Maybe it's Detroit. Maybe it's health care reform here compared to HC reform somewhere else. We have a pretty good group here and highly intelligent and diverse at that. Nothing against the lulz, but it would be sweet to have this separation. Contrary to how this issue is being framed, the idea has been suggested for years. It may not be the best idea, it may be turned down again, but I have noticed a 'breath of fresh air' throughout the site the last few months. Just giving it another try.

Our community has the bingo hall (forum games)
Our community has the juvenile detention center (OT)
Our community could benefit greatly IMO from a gentleman's club (The Star Chamber)

This is un-american and needs to be quashed immediately.

[Dukasaur]

Here's my piece. I think there is a lot of opportunity here to learn from other people all around the world, and some do, but I think there is a lot of room for improvement. Sometimes people might want to know what is really going on in somewhere in China and would like to hear from someone in China. Maybe it's Detroit. Maybe it's health care reform here compared to HC reform somewhere else. We have a pretty good group here and highly intelligent and diverse at that. Nothing against the lulz, but it would be sweet to have this separation. Contrary to how this issue is being framed, the idea has been suggested for years. It may not be the best idea, it may be turned down again, but I have noticed a 'breath of fresh air' throughout the site the last few months. Just giving it another try.

Our community has the bingo hall (forum games)
Our community has the juvenile detention center (OT)
Our community could benefit greatly IMO from a gentleman's club (The Star Chamber)

This is un-american and needs to be quashed immediately.

You have no special right to decide what is un-american and what is not. You are not Stephen Colbert.

[thegreekdog]

Thing is, I already know who will band together against this. Maybe some other people have input as well. I know there are lots of lurkers on the site who would like to participate (I know more than a handful) in that section of the forum, but they don't, because they easily lose their temper or are afraid or they are above or turned off by or think they will get laughed at and teased about one of the two subjects in the issue. They might want to get giggles but don't because they hate politics and religion, or they might want to go see what someone is saying on politics and religion and what is being shared on the topic, but don't want to scan through 5 pages of lulzers to find the next on topic serious post. I think where it may just be best for some people to easily skip over one topic or another, many times the temptation is too irresistible, and before they know it they are seeing red and saying things they don't mean to say or changing the purpose for their participation in the thread.

I don't think anyone should be banned, or anyone should be reported, but it would make it easier for people to get what they came for. Just a suggestion

I think this was posted oppositely (if that's the appropriate use of that word), but someone making a similar suggestion (i.e. they didn't want to have to go through all the American politics threads to find the lulz). That being typed, even if you get a subforum, I don't think it will work the way you intend; rather, people can just put their lulz in that subforum in your serious threads.

Perhaps you should form a usergroup?

[mrswdk]

many people have long ago stopped clicking on the Obamacare thread to find any real information or conversation

Probably because that thread reached a point where it was just you spamming a succession of online opinion pieces and putting your fingers in your ears whenever anyone contradicted you, which is ironic in the context of you bemoaning the lack of serious intellectual discussion taking place within OT.

[thegreekdog]

universalchiro and PS...

To be perfectly frank, honest, and serious for a second, you are either both willfully ignorant or just ignorant. There are many threads discussing intellectual issues that are both enlightening and entertaining in OT. I give you the following example which I can only assume three people have read (me, BBS, and Mets).

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=93718&start=6165#p4415432

Start there and read. If you don't find it intellectually stimulating with precisely the sort of topics that Phatscotty cares about (he created the thread, after all), then your threads in the Star Chamber won't work.

Yes, I saw that BBS and Mets have been working very, very hard indeed. I have noticed over the years, every time somebody is crossing the line, they hurry up and make a serious post and showcase their value to the community. Not saying that's what's going on there.

Yeah, it's not going on there. Maybe you should read their posts. Honestly, you're offensive with this, especially your "I'm not saying this is what's going on there, but..." nonsense. Mets and BBS are two of the most intelligent posters around here and you should be ashamed of even hinting that they're trying to curry favor by posting in that thread. Seriously dude, this is shitty stuff.

[notyou2]

universalchiro and PS...

To be perfectly frank, honest, and serious for a second, you are either both willfully ignorant or just ignorant. There are many threads discussing intellectual issues that are both enlightening and entertaining in OT. I give you the following example which I can only assume three people have read (me, BBS, and Mets).

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=93718&start=6165#p4415432

Start there and read. If you don't find it intellectually stimulating with precisely the sort of topics that Phatscotty cares about (he created the thread, after all), then your threads in the Star Chamber won't work.

Yes, I saw that BBS and Mets have been working very, very hard indeed. I have noticed over the years, every time somebody is crossing the line, they hurry up and make a serious post and showcase their value to the community. Not saying that's what's going on there.

Yeah, it's not going on there. Maybe you should read their posts. Honestly, you're offensive with this, especially your "I'm not saying this is what's going on there, but..." nonsense. Mets and BBS are two of the most intelligent posters around here and you should be ashamed of even hinting that they're trying to curry favor by posting in that thread. Seriously dude, this is shitty stuff.

That is blasphatness!!!!

[Phatscotty]

Imagine PhatSoctty all alone in his forum arguing about fiscal policy. It would be great!

As long as OT is not affected by this suggestion, then I support it. There's some chance of lulz to be had.

I don't think we should limit it to fiscal policy, which is the only topic in which Phatscotty is interested. I think it needs to be all types of intellectual discussions.

So, you mean, you have not read the OP? Please, read the OP of the thread in which you are opining. The OP says politics, economics, religion, philosophy etc. Fiscal policy is only a small part of one of the four topics identified.