This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Poll: Should all political threads be merged into one?

Should all political threads be merged into one super thread?

  • Yes: Merge all current and future political threads into one super thread.

    Votes: 20 47.6%

  • No: I like it the way it is, no change.

    Votes: 22 52.4%
  • Total voters
    42
  • Poll closed .
Jump to new
Joe, if you can make any sense out of all this garbage you will need the wisdom of Solomon. My advice is to let sleeping dogs lie. I really don't see what the problem is. If a few malcontents have a problem with General Chat all they have to do is ignore it. If you have a problem, then Rule 1 is your solution.
 

+1 as I said earlier I posted a question regarding a company. Two years later a response arrived, when it came on the radar.lol
 
I think the merging of duplicate threads would be the main one, and would cut out alot of clutter

A sub forum sounds good too
 

Joe, one should ask what role Tony Abbott played in this matter?
 
Tink said:
I think the merging of duplicate threads would be the main one, and would cut out alot of clutter

A sub forum sounds good too
Click to expand...

I agree Tink as the merging of duplicate threads would seem the simplest way to reduce the number of threads and hopefully offer some compromise to those who find the quantity of political threads annoying.

A political sub forum could work too.

It would seem we are in unprecedented times in political history and, as such, political posts are going to be higher than normal with no short term relief in sight. I hardly ever used to comment on politics a few years ago but the current situation have so many talking about politics - and that's not just on a forum.
 

+1

Any obvious duplicate threads to be merged otherwise only act on actual real need, the way this works has evolved through the way people want to use it and the people are always right.
 
MrBurns said:
+1

Any obvious duplicate threads to be merged otherwise only act on actual real need, the way this works has evolved through the way people want to use it and the people are always right.
Click to expand...

Trying to compartmentalise people's thoughts and ideas will not work in a free society. :shake:
 
Calliope said:
Trying to compartmentalise people's thoughts and ideas will not work in a free society. :shake:
Click to expand...

We are really only talking about the headings for goodness sake. Will have no effect on what is able to be said or debated, we will all soon know where our own action is.

You just love those newsmedia short sensationalist grabs ole pal. In fact rarely do the headings reflect anywhere near the true content of the incident/statement etc.

I had to attend a media school once and learned how important it was if you wanted to get an idea across it had to be in the grab "short, sharp, succinct and attention getting . But when thought about it is far from democratic and is why the industry employs sociologist to guide the agenda..
 
explod said:
We are really only talking about the headings for goodness sake. Will have no effect on what is able to be said or debated, we will all soon know where our own action is.
Click to expand...

Fools rush in...

compartmentalise - separate into isolated compartments or categories;
Click to expand...

That exactly describes the proposed actions regarding political debate.
 
Calliope said:
Trying to compartmentalise people's thoughts and ideas will not work in a free society. :shake:
Click to expand...
So the generally accepted version of a forum (you know, the things with sub-categories and thread titles) is in no way compartmentalised?

Do forums not work is that what you are saying?

What ARE you actually trying to say?

I would have thought, if you had something insightful to say it wouldn't matter what bloody thread it was posted in, as long as the title was in some way related to your subject matter. Of course, that wouldn't work in a free-society because in a free society people compain about freedom of speech without exercising the more important freedom of thought.
 
Calliope said:
Fools rush in...



That exactly describes the proposed actions regarding political debate.
Click to expand...

So any heading is going to be a problem. Okay so the whole of ASF should in your view be just one big thread without headings because on your take headings are undemocratic.

We are just splitting hairs and chasing our own tails.

Looking back on you posts it is interesting to note that virtually all of you interest here is political. And you want those short grabs as headings. You do not really want to discuss or debate you want to influence people and impose yourself. To dictate in effect.

Anyway the status quo seems to be against you and a consensus compromise seems to be the way ist will go.
 

There is a new thread "Australian Greens Discussion". Instead of making silly accusations against me why don't you visit that thread and push your case for the abolition of mining in Australia and your plans to re-locate the half million jobs that the Mining Industries generate.

This is one of your more inane posts;


It would fit in nicely in the new thread.
 
This thread is fast turning into a perfect example of all the pointless political threads here on ASF. All emotion and no rationality or analysis
 
Calliope said:
I dont moderate politcal threads as i very rarely see the point discussing politics, hence i do not read those threads,
Click to expand...
Politics is rarely discussed in physical social situations (in my experience) and there's a reason for that. It's the same for religion. In reality, only a small proportion of the population are genuine swinging voters. That leaves the remainder with a partisan bias whether they realise it or not.

Our political leaders nor the media provide a conducive environment for discussion of this country's future, which is unfortunate in my view. The key to discussing politics in my view is to not take it too seriously, which is not always easy. The only way to eliminate partisan commentary from politics is to ban political discussion alltogether. That's why yesterday I suggested a seperate sub-forum for politics that others who are not interested could avoid.
 
Well now we seem to have twice as many political threads then before.

It's an election year and we are on the back end of labor, political threads will pop up. I doubt we will have many new threads after September. But atm it's a hot topic.

Seriously... Having a whinge about pointless threads after:
reading it , being offended by it, then taking the time to post your'e own rant about it, instead of just reading the bits you want to read seems a little daft.
Whinging about other people being stupid after taking the time to read through and post here instead of sticking to the stocks section seems a little hypocritical.

Keep it simple :
Mod abuse
Merge new similar threads to old high traffic thread
Learn how to not read and comment on threads just because you don't like them.

Don't we have 14 forums devoted to stocks and one to BS and Blurt on.
Iv'e got no problem with taking general chat off the new posts list.
 
drsmith said:
Some forums such as DTV Froum Australia do that and you have to log in to access the general discussion section.
Click to expand...

There's a travel forum I'm a member of, to post in the politics section you have to have been a member for six months and have a minimum of 180 posts, this also applies to the general chat forum it has. It's also not indexed on Google. It stays remarkably civil, most of the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

How does Labor salvage the furniture?
Replies
14
Views
4K
Surly
S
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...