I will leave this thread here for a while since it directly deals with the forum itself.
I will move it later to the Feedback section.
Rgds,
Rascal
Moderator IP Forum
Oh Lord…no, no, no. Not another forum dealing with politics. Set up a US politics forum with an American as Moderator and watch those leftist European greaseballs howl. Set up a US politics forum with a European as Mod and then we have to listen to those red-neck, Bud Lite swilling, okies howl.
[quote=“Rascal”]I will leave this thread here for a while since it directly deals with the forum itself.
I will move it later to the Feedback section.
Rgds,
Rascal
Moderator IP Forum[/quote]
Please set up a poll, Rascal and leave it for a week. Simple yes or no answer to the question. The thread leads logically to a poll, so jsut do it.
Erm…please.
BroonAppeal
Poll based on the request & suggestions by BroonAle: Should we split the IP forum into IP and US Politics?
Rgds,
Rascal
Moderator IP Forum
So, Rascal…now that you have done the first bit, how about you use the result of the poll to effect a decision on the “Splittism” issue?
BroonApartheid (orginal meaning)
Split, don’t split. As long as everyone recognizes and admits that the US is the greatest force for good in the world and that the German and French governments are corrupt, wrong-headed and evil, then I have no problems with it.
Did you vote? 
BroonSplittist
Sorry, but the decision wouldn’t be mine. If there is a clear indication that a split is desired I will propose it to the administration, but it’s for them to decide.
PS: It’s a tie currently.
Rgds,
Rascal
Moderator IP Forum
Yes, Rascal, we know. It’s clearly visible. Most people in here can read but thanks for the heads up
BroonEyes
(with apologies to Art Garfunkel)
Do you honestly think that political threads that were not about America would stay that way? How can you possibly discuss, say, the Middle East without getting into US policy? It’s a silly idea, and one requiring more moderator input.
You’re free to talk politics here but don’t mention America.
Split the partisan domestic bickering of left and right on US domestic politics from 'international politics. It may surprise some that not absolutely everything involves the US. Scottish devolution doesn’t.
BroonExample
You may be right, BA. I think that news of - and posts about - tactical, American domestic actions are dominating this forum to a large extent. And further, I think it’s harming the overall, aggregrate forumosan’s perception of America and Americans.
I’m fairly certain that it’s leading to the conclusion to which you only hint at here (but you’ve said more directly elsewhere): Americans are buffoons with far more money than brains.
I say this primarily because I note that the pro-Bush smear topic has a far higher view/response ratio (about 600/80) than the pro-Kerry smear topic (about 500/85).
As an American, I’m far too close it all to keep my objectivity, but it astounds me that anybody could reward Bush by justifying his faith in the desire of all humans to follow the path of a red herring. More likely, then, that forumosans are paying the pro-Bush smears more attention because they reinforce certain, perhaps long-standing negative attitudes about the US. In other words, the ratio sizes can only mean that forumosans would rather believe that, when it comes to domestic American politics, all Americans are idiots than that only Bushies are.
It’s a sign that likely most forumosans agree with you, I think.
IP isn’t going to be split anytime soon… Thanks for the feedback, though.
[quote=“flike”]You may be right, BA.
It’s a sign that likely most forumosans agree with you, I think.[/quote]
I may appear dumb to pompous pricks but evidently you possess a greater wisdom than most and are able to read in a considered manner.
Thank You.
BroonAbderian
Please don’t think I’m being patronizing when I point out that politics usually involves group allegiances, which means that some kind of belligerence usually lies under the surface of the dialogue, and that belligerence will eventually involve ad hominem or personal attacks.
To use a rather extreme example, imagine a discussion between a old Spanish Falangist and a old Spanish Communist. I mean, they may have shot at each other. They may have shot each other, without the at! Democratic politics only tweaks that sort of animus down a notch or so, if that much.
I don’t object to that sort of thing so much (by “that sort of thing,” I mean the animus, not the shooting) as I find it irritating to have to wade through all that to get to the issue supposedly being discussed.
I couldn’t vote in the poll because (a) I’m not ready to say no moderators; (b) as stated above, I think some flames or flame-like posts are inevitable in such discussions; and (c) I think pre-moderating would hinder the flow of the discussion (not to mention that I can’t imagine that the mod(s) would like it very much).
I’m glad I don’t have to decide such things, but if I had to, I think I’d adopt a loose “on topic” policy. That is, once the cuss-fest or other flaming reached such relative purity that neither the topic nor any ancillary topic could be fairly readily discerned, then it might be time to excise that segment of the dialogue.
Hoo-boy, this is probably a bad analogy, but I’ll try it anyway: Bill Cosby once did a routine about handball called “No Cursing at the Y,” in which he remarked that the main reason for the rule was that people were waiting their turn on the handball court. In other words, the kind of cursing that would satisfy a handball player would take up too much court time.
I’m not saying “No Cursing at the IP Forum,” I’m saying that the underlyinig idea is instructive. I’m not so much concerned with netiquette as I am with being able to follow the points that people are making or trying to make.
Piss off. That’s stupid. FS posted waaaaaay before me. I have not involved myself (much) in any discussion on the now long-in-the-tooth racism/rascal/moderating scraps and anyway, where is the inflammation in posting about Nepal or questioning the clutter in the IP forum that now exists?[/quote]
Oh, great, you start ONE serious thread in seven months, and because you don’t get the attention you want, you suddenly decide this means you have to start ranting about how to inconvenience everyone else.
Fred usually gets his facts straight and then posts something relevant. Remember when you started ranting about the U.S. attempting to assassinate foreign leaders? I don’t think you ever responded to my note that Kennedy was the last one to pull that crap, that Ford had issued an executive order prohibiting it, and that every president since Ford – including Bush – has renewed that. You (ahem) shoot first and aim later. (Hey, were you at the Bay of Pigs?)
But I guess you have an excuse since it was just around then that your ability to post got locked while the “Star Chamber” decided on whether to ban you or not over your having posted your “Bush is a KNOB!” rant in a few thousand threads.
Noooooooo, really? I hadn’t noticed.
[quote=“BroonWhatever”]Trends only become ‘trends’ when there is a willingness to follow one. That’s a freedom of choice issue. So don’t bloody lecture me, you sanctimonious so and so.
BroonAle[/quote]
So you want to break the forum up in order to, er, what exactly? Interfere with others’ freedom of choice?
Man, the IP forum is so bloated. There’s so much traffic that sometimes what’s posted in the AM, gets lost in the PM same day :fume:
I’ve given up following threads and discussions because if I try, I know I can’t follow through and it’s not worth the troubles. :stinkyface: There are still nuggets of good stuff in there when you sort out the noise. I think splitting the forum will help improve the signal to noise ratio a lot.
Getting rid of the noise would also improve the signal to noise ratio. 
Getting rid of the noise would also improve the signal to noise ratio. [/quote]
Well, getting rid of the noise can be done a number of ways:
- Splitting the forum - analyze where the noise is coming from, is it based on topics, posters or something else?
- Censoring - Only add fuel to the fire
- Ignore button - requires self-activation and not dependable because noise comes from so many places
- Self-restraint - I’m a funny guy I know
The only reasonable ways of reducing noise are choices one and two as choices three and four require some self-discipline which as we know is the primary reason for the spike in noise 
That’s why I suggested splitting the IP Forum. It was not to be antagonistic or wind people up but to ease navigation and simplify it. If one wants to discuss something of international import, one first has to wade through an incredible amount of Bush vs Kerry junk. Naturally, the US election is extremely important but the rest of the world continues to move along too and the rest of the world fails to get the forum space it deserves, IMO. One or two mentions on pages 3, 5 and 7 but who in reality goes back that far to post a reply? Very few so one by default makes a comment on something on page one and then goes off to make a cup of tea, wondering if Sierra Leone still exists.
Though initially discounted as the lunatic rantings of a madman, the splitting notion does have some support; far more than the BroonAntis assume, I surmise.
BroonAltiloquent