Should there be a separate "Political Discussions" forum?

[TenPercenter]

Can someone bring the results of this poll to the attention of someone in "position" here? I like to take part in political duiscussions too. But lately I rarely come into the Other Topics anymore because I can't wade through the political muck. When I have a non-political question, it's run off of the front page in one day from all the "Bush/Kerry bashing" topics.

Since it looks like the poll shows most of us want the topic split, let's see if the higher-ups will do it for us.

Ten

[ChristinaB]

If you feel strongly about it, send Mason a PM with a link to this thread. Did you notice that Ray Zee made a comment in this thread?

Political threads are obvious from their titles, how hard can it be to wade through them (just don't click on them).

[TenPercenter]

[ QUOTE ]
If you feel strongly about it, send Mason a PM with a link to this thread. Did you notice that Ray Zee made a comment in this thread?

[/ QUOTE ]

Like I mentioned, I was asking for someone that "knew someone" that could do something about it. I am a new poster here, what clout would I have? I asked the question, and 70% want a split. So, you're telling me that "Mason" is the one in charge of splitting forums? Ok, thanks. I sent him a message.

And yes I did "notice that Ray Zee made a comment". Did you notice that I replied to him before asking me that?

[ QUOTE ]
Political threads are obvious from their titles, how hard can it be to wade through them (just don't click on them).

[/ QUOTE ]

I can see where you voted. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] Well, it's not "hard" as you say it, but why not make things better? When you think about it, "how hard can it be to wade through " topics at RGP? They have only one topic. I always thought that this forum is better because of it organized forums.

And you must not have read my posts, I never said that it was hard to read the subject lines, or hard "not to click" on them. My point is that I simply don't come in here much anymore BECAUSE of the shear number of political mud throwing topics. When you post any topic, it's 20+ topics down by a few hours. Why not give the topics a chance that are not simply a "I hate your side of the isle and here's why" topic?


Ten

[p.s. I don't usually get this smart-ass with my posts, but it seemed appropriate for your smart-ass reply to my benign poll/posts.

p.p.s. While writing this, three topics are already created above this one, and the top one is called "Vote for Bush...or DIE!!!"]

[Utah]

I would like to see a pure sports forum. Some good sports threads get buried in all the political discussions.

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
but why not make things better?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it would make it better. This is a poker forum. The more categories you make for non-poker topics, the more you dilute the forum. The left pane that lists the various forums shouldn't require scrolling down to see everything listed. It is already cluttered. Frankly, I'm surprized that they have as many as they do, and that they are organized in the way that they are. I have to scroll down to see a link to their books --- proprietary information upon which they make their money. That seems silly to me.

There is already a lot of overlap - News, views, gossip (should be poker related, but isn't) --- World Poker Tour tends to be a lot of News, views, and gossip. Psychology should be poker psychology, but some guy keeps throwing in religion posts that should probably be in Other Topics.

In my opinion, twoplustwo shouldn't want to dilute the nature of their forum by offering too many off-topic forums. Having one off-topic area is plenty.

[elwoodblues]

How about a "favorites" forum? Favorite movies, favorite tv shows, favorite hottie over 40.

[ChristinaB]

[ QUOTE ]
p.s. I don't usually get this smart-ass with my posts, but it seemed appropriate for your smart-ass reply to my benign poll/posts.

[/ QUOTE ]

My reply was not smart-ass, you read that into it. (this reply however may be [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img])

[ QUOTE ]
And yes I did "notice that Ray Zee made a comment". Did you notice that I replied to him before asking me that?


[/ QUOTE ]

I mentioned Ray Zee for the same reason I mentioned Mason - they are already aware of this issue. However, if you read Ray's post, it is clear he doesn't really agree with you on creating a new forum. So your plan to make them aware of this thread is flawed. (They know, they disagree with you, Deal with it)

[ QUOTE ]
But lately I rarely come into the Other Topics anymore because I can't wade through the political muck.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was from the post I replied to, I think one could interpret this as your saying "wading through this forum is hard".

[ QUOTE ]
When I have a non-political question, it's run off of the front page in one day from all the "Bush/Kerry bashing" topics.


[/ QUOTE ]

I saw your Olympics transcripts post the first time and the second time. I had nothing to contribute to it, others saw it too. We didn't reply because we had nothing to say, not because it was pushed off the front page. Deal with it.

[TenPercenter]

[ QUOTE ]
your plan to make them aware of this thread is flawed. (They know, they disagree with you, Deal with it)

[/ QUOTE ]

Christina, you didn't mention before that you have spoken to multiple 2+2 people that would be in a position to make this decision. I'm glad you stepped up, being someone in a position to have discussions with board administrators. Since you know that "they disagree" with the 71% of the members in this poll, then I guess the rest of us will have to "Deal with it."

Thanks for your help.

Ten