Wish there was a GD/Politics forum that didn't discuss primary candidates..

[elizm]

I'd love to be able to discuss the things that unite us instead of divide us somewhere.

[JeffR]

1. Amen n/t

[elizm]

2. Say, who is that avator image?

Looks like Joni Mitchell...who I am listening to right at this moment. Could it be?

[JeffR]

3. It is.

The Blue cover.

[elizm]

4. Was listening to "Urge for Going"...How serendipitous! :) nt

[JeffR]

5. Perfect!

:)

[welshTerrier2]

6. count me in

we need a forum that moves a little slower than GD but doesn't drown us in campaign polls and campaign sniping.

maybe the admins will find us a new GD home. i'd love to see a forum with rules that required longer and more analytical posting. it would also be nice to require that if people are posting articles or news stories or whatever that they had to provide some discussion along with their post. it's useless to open a news item in a GD forum that I could have read elsewhere.

oh, well. we can only recommend.

and, not to be left out regarding previous posts in this thread, I love Joni Mitchell. Saw her in concert way back in about 1970. Sat about 5 feet away from her.

[elizm]

7. LOL...We are all definitely on the same page...JM and all!

So how do we recommend this new kind of page?? :)

[welshTerrier2]

8. here's a link on how to request a new group

note, however, that groups are different from forums. the forums get much higher traffic. many groups only get a few posts a month. no idea how to request a forum. your best bet would probably be to drop an email to the admins explaining why you think a new forum would be beneficial.

here's the link on how to request a new group: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=206x10

[elizm]

9. Hmmm...Do you think we could get enough interest in a forum? nt

[welshTerrier2]

14. no idea how much support there would be. plenty of complaints about the GDP "noise" though.

i'd recommend writing to the admins before you started a thread like that. Ask them what they think and ask them how you should ask the question in a thread.

perhaps you could tell them what you see as the drawbacks of the current forums and how a new forum might improve DU. my own preference, as I suggested above, would be to have some rules, or at least guidelines, that encouraged more discussion in the threads. I don't know exactly how to achieve that but I would definitely not allow subject-line-only posts like "OMG OMG bush is going crazy n/t". I also think it might be worth having a more stringent set of rules for the OP as opposed to responses. The main objective would be to stimulate more analysis and more discussion.

Everyone's complaining about all the "hate" and the insults and the lack of civility in GDP. Here's a typical thread:

OP: Obama really screwed up. He'll never win now.
Poster 1: He's going to blow Hillary away.
OP: Oh yeah. Obama is way behind in the polls. Barry Bonds just endorsed Hillary.
Poster 1: Bonds is jerk. I wouldn't be surprised if Hillary takes steroids.
OP: you're such a jerk.
Poster 1: no you are.
OP: bwahahahahaha ... look whose talking. n/t

The answer to fixing this is NOT to pass a bunch of super-restrictive rules in my opinion. Threads like the above should be allowed if that's what gives people their jollies ... I just wish I had an easy way to avoid the nonsense. The campaign stuff is pervasive. It's too bad they don't require posts like those to go to the politics/campaign group. We already have one of those.

Anyway, that should be enough to get you started. If you do post a thread like I'm suggesting, it would be very useful to ask for lots of input on exactly how it would work. It might actually be better coming from the admins. Maybe the same thread should be posted in both GD and GDP. Who knows? Anyway, the weekends are often a bit slower around here. The best time for a thread like that might be during the week.

Hope this helps. Good luck.

[hijinx87]

10. I have suggested a "candidate wars" forum

since the hostility between the various camps literally
sucks all of the oxygen out of this forum.

[tammywammy]

12. Agreed! n/t

[hijinx87]

13. I really do think that is the solution

most of the bitter fights would start there in the first place. but
when a thread boiled over here, it could simply be moved there.

we have a long time to go before we have a nominee. I don't think
we are going to make it without a place for people to blow off steam.

[wyldwolf]

11. General Discussion

General Discussion: Politics was originally called General Discussion: 2004 Primary. It was set up to discuss primary candidates because General Discussion was being overrun by primary posts. After the primary season, the name was changed to General Discussion: Politics

[hijinx87]

15. yeah, but I think we have outgrown that structure

we are bigger and, quite frankly, more polarized than we were
then.

I really do think a "candidate wars" forum is the solution.