Mason/Chuck/Mat, With The War Coming....

[Bill Murphy]

..it's now DEFINITELY time to split the Other Topics forum in half: Politics/Current Events & Sports/Entertainment/Fun

With the new software it should be no problem to do. I also propose that anyone who posts any political stuff in the proposed SEF forum be barred immediately and that the obscenity rules be waived regarding flames & PM's directed at the violator.

If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times: I wanna run smack about Tiger, Phold, and the Oscars, and I don't wanna wade thru a bunch of "Bush=Anti-Christ" & "French=Cowards" drivel in order to do so.

This forum s'gonna explode in the next coupla weeks, so let's hup to it, get on the stick, and do us all a favor. The exact meta-analo-imile-phor would be if Internet stuff was still on the Mid-limit Hold'em forum.

And now, a poll:

[adios]

I agree with you. I voted to split them up. I am leaving the forum for awhile. The discussions are good but they're too time consumming.

[John Cole]

Bill,

I voted to leave it alone, but I don't believe that makes Bill an idiot.

John

[MMMMMM]

This poll is a perfect example of my complaint regarding how pop-polls are often structured on major news sites.

[Rick Nebiolo]

Bill,

But politics is the most fun /forums/images/icons/smile.gif. I would rename some of the forums for clarity. This one should be Poker Players Sound Off.

~ Rick

[MMMMMM]

I don't have any trouble bypassing the all boring posts about Sports.

You don't have to wade through anything if you set your "My Home" preferences to show, on the main page, only the initial posts in each separate thread rather than the entire threads themselves.

[IrishHand]

My personal favorites are when major sites post provocative articles, then post a related poll question. I forget which site I read it on, but about a week ago there was an article in favor of nuking Baghdad if the Iraqi army uses any WMD in defense of their country. Just to the right of the article was, sure enough, "Would you be in favor of nuking Baghdad if they use any form of WMD?" As if the accompanying article wasn't going to skew the response to the question enough, the options to answer were something like "Yes, they deserve it" or "No, using nuclear weapons is never justified." So, not only was the poll hopelessly biased by virtue of its presentation, it also had incomplete answers (meaning their wording supposed choosing Y/N based on the reason they gave, as opposed to another.

[MMMMMM]

At last we agree on something.