What is and what is not a political thread...and a proposal (PF)

[Menard]

There's a reason, and some of you just haven't gotten this (so pay attention), that some of us just don't come around here much, and that is that we don't like the political and religious discussions and bu||sh:t.

Now it's understandable that a thread about Palin, Obama, or any other blatantly political topic is going to be a political thread. I once wrote a rather lengthy reply (shock) on the old SciFilm forum about when someone posts a warning, such as they did with the thread in question, and someone looks and is offended after looking, it's their fault for looking. The same can be said for openly political threads on this forum; if it's about an obviously political subject...hey, guess what, if it's going to be a political thread...there's going to be political discussion...and if someone looks after having been warned, it's their fault for looking.

The problem is not political threads, although I personally detest them, the problem is keeping the political remarks out of other threads.

Hey, guess what? Some of us come here to have fun, get away, and really don't give a

EDIT:  Don't bypass the censor filter on purpose

about someone's political comments.

What made me think of this is a reply of Indy's in the karma thread.

Menard gives but does not receive . . .
I got a ton of negs when I first logged on here; since we started requiring reasons for smitage I think I have only gotten a few, and most of those were from Judge Death, a flaming liberal jerk who has since departed the premises.  I don't give a ton of negs, although every now and then Lester and I disagree enough that I've dinged him.  Not in awhile, though.

Some could say that a karma thread leaves itself open to remarks about liberals and conservatives, but personally I don't give a damn if Judge Death was a flaming liberal, flaming conservative, or flaming whatever the hell he was or was not.

Now I'm not trying to pick on Indy here...you know I love you Angela...but we were just having fun in a thread until someone comes in and makes a swipe at liberals or conservatives...it doesn't matter who, or which one they they are swiping at.

If you notice the (PF) designation on this thread, that stands for Potential Flaming. That's the proposal part of this thread. I am proposing that we have a political designation for threads the same as we would NSFW (not safe for work) or the old OT (off topic) before we had a separate off topic forum.

Since there is not a specific political or flaming forum on here, and I don't disagree with not having one as it would invite more flaming, I suggest that threads would could become political or in which you are inviting political comment be marked with such a designation; if someone looks, then it's their fault for looking.

[indianasmith]

Sounds fair to me; I generally try to avoid being excessively confrontational, but I enjoy discussing both political and religious topics on occasion, and I'd rather discuss them here, with people that I know and like, who know how to disagree and remain civil (Judge Death notwithstanding), than with strangers on a purely political forum. Heck, I don't BELONG to any purely political forums. 
  If I bring up a discussion that I feel with invite controversy, I'll not a PF in the subject line from now on.

Happy?

(Of course not.  Menards are never happy.)

[ulthar]

There's another forum I read (why, I don't know, I really almost hate it) that has had quite a few problems over the years with "political" content.

They've tried a number of solutions, including tagging like you propose.

Then people came out of the woodwork in everyother thread asking why {insert comment} was not labeled "political."  See, people saw conflict where they wanted to see it.  Over half the time, it was really bland stuff that was getting feathers riled up.

Then they went to a separate "political forum" under the same domain name...a completely different board.  That worked for a while, I guess.  There was only a few that posted there, and they had some VERY heated flamewars debates.  People complained that there was a separate board, and that it "divided" the "community."

One day, the admin decided that the flamewars had gotten just a little flamey and shut it down.  Now, there's no political forum, no tagging of political posts...political discussions are "banned."  Well, except for certain members, that's true.  Some can say whatever the heck they want and NEVER get reprimanded, but that's another discussion.

The funny thing is that even a total "ban" has not made everyone happy.  This particular forum is for an activity that is mostly male centric, and someone posted a message stating that fact and why the market demands certain product designs because of it and out of the woodwork (the same woodwork) comes two or three of the few female participants raging on the Neanderthal like mind-set of the rest of the board and it was "on."  197 posts in a couple days later, and whew, the whole thing seemed about to implode upon itself.

My point is that some folks are not going to be happy no matter what; people will find a why to argue.  Yes, politics invites it, but just about everything can be labeled "politics" in this day and age.  You could make the most innocent intended post on something and dollars to doughnuts it will be misunderstood by somebody, and they will be offended by it.

So tag away, but my bet is that it won't help in the long term.

[Menard]

Happy?

(Of course not.  Menards are never happy.)

[Trevor]

(Of course not.  Menards are never happy.)

Yes, all they ever do is tell the boat crew that they can leave. 

[Killer Bees]

Politics and religion are certainly volatile subjects.  I  have my own beliefs about both of those things and I'm always interested in what others have to say and what their viewpoints are.  I"m always open to being surprised and learning something new.

I don't take others' comments peronsally if they disagree with me.  I also dont feel that my positions are threatened if someone gives me a hard time.  I believe what I believe and I accept the diversity of other folks on this planet.

It always mystifies me why some take things so personally.   But I do agree tagging a subject is probably a good thing.

[Olivia Bauer]

I've been to many forums that ban religion and politics. I don't blame them. It's a touchy subject, I personally hate both topics. Menard's proposal makes sense.

[Newt]

As far as I have observed (here and elsewhere), certain subjects with certain members involved in the discussion are bound to become political or religious debates.  Ugly or no, they are destined to end up there.  It's a given.  If I see a provocative title, offered up by a member I know has such inclinations, I try to avoid the thread from the get-go. No biggie.

Aside from the obvious loophole that any thread can 'go south', my only concern regarding labelling threads is that it may give the impression that such a label sanctions a no-holds-barred free-for-all.  WE all understand that is not the case: but since a labelling convention would be primarily to the benefit of realtive newbies (who may not be familiar enough with the board and the personalities involved to form their own judgements/expectations), it is quite possible that the label could be mistaken as permission to 'have at it'.  I see a potential headache for the mods in that: how do you argue for better behaviour when it is perceived that the rules have been suspended?

[Flick James]

I don't really see it as broken. Sure there are the occasional flare-ups, but overall I think Andrew runs things well. He let's things be until they become insulting or ridiculous and shuts it down. I enjoy the debates so it doesn't bother me, but if I didn't care for that kind of thing I guess it would. I think I do a pretty good job of expressing my positions without being disrespectful, but then maybe some will disagree. I don't mind it if somebody calls me on being a dick, I just may not always agree.

[macabre]

hi
Okay here i go guys and ladies.
I understand what Menard is saying and to a certain degree i fully soupport what he asks for and yet,yes i have a yet.
If we are to start tagging particular subjects because we feel they invite volatile circumstances then we may as well tag every subject we discuss on this forum.
I realise that politics and religion are touchy subjects and you will always guarantee heated conversations with these subjects but HELL, some people feel passionate about their music, some about movies ,i am a massive fan of Boris Karloff but i am sure some of you guys probably don't like him. I love coming on this site because like flick i feel it is open and fun and we can discuss serious life changing subjects such as personal issues then next we are discussing if you sit down or stand up whilst wiping your ass. You cannot get this kind of discussion anywhere else and i would hate it to degenerate into "we can discuss this subject freely but not this one"
I understand that i am one voice and do not wish to offend anyone i just wanted to put my two cents in.

[Ed, Ego and Superego]

(PF) The ultra-liberal, superconservative, cryptofascist, religio-humanist, rightwing/left wing ,hippie, John Birch loving nutcase Menard might have something.
I avoid politics when I can... you can't change peoples mind on this stuff, and my opinions don't matter much to you.  And it can damage a perfectly good relationship too bott.Some of my best friends and favorite people here are from very different places on the politcal spectrum.   But a warning that a thread could be offensive might not be a bad idea. 
-Ed

[Flick James]

PF sounds like a silent fart.