RB Political Discussion Meta Thread

[T-hawk]

I think it can work that way, yes. (I tried testing it but couldn't prove it on my own account, admin access overrides a ban defined by another user group.)

It seems we're all in favor of a politics subforum, the only question is public or private or password-protected. I favor public, but that's an opinion without much weight, since I don't want to do anything around enacting a conduct policy or imposing bans. I'm not sure whose decision it is to make, but I think it's Brick's to either implement or delegate.

[Thoth]

2 forums could be set up:

One public "Politics" forum, locked so no new threads can be started and one locked thread in it giving instructions on how to request access to the hidden "Politics" forum.

People can see that there is a politics forum, read any rules and request accesd if desired. People who act up in the hidden forum get their access revoked.

[T-hawk]

Since activity started up in this thread again with politics, and there wasn't really any strong consensus on forum organization, I went with the simple solution. Here's a politics subforum, public and open at present, we'll see if that ever needs to change.

I also split out the last few politics posts from this thread, to leave this one as meta-discussion around organizing and such. And I left the old original thread here and locked. I suggest new threads here for any particular topics.

[Gustaran]

I suggest new threads here for any particular topics.

An excellent idea, unfortunately the current "Brexit" thread has almost immediately drifted towards discussion about Trump and American politics.

It would be great if a mod could split up that topic, so we have separate threads for Brexit and another for "American Politics/Trump" (or whatever name people prefer).

[MJW (ya that one)]

I don't think there's enough activity to justify more than one thread. But I'll leave it up to you because I don't care that much...

[T-hawk]

I was just thinking the same thing, so that's enough consensus for me. Threads for Brexit and American make sense, so I split up the Brexit thread into that. Although there hasn't been any real Brexit news lately.

[Gustaran]

I don't think there's enough activity to justify more than one thread.

Although there hasn't been any real Brexit news lately.

While this is correct, European elections are going to take place in May and further developments about Brexit are going to happen sooner or later. I appreciate the new clearer separation, I found it somewhat annoying in the past that the talk about Brexit options was mixed with unrelated talk about other different topics.

Likewise, at the moment I personally have no interest to debate the latest controversial Trump tweet, so I am glad this is now in another topic which I don't have to check regularly.

[MJW (ya that one)]

So now it's

-American Thread
-Brexit Thread
-Other stuff thread

I don't think there's enough activity to justify more than one total poltical thread. I believe that Brexit can be spun off successfully if you want because it's more focused but not the American thread which would make this:

-Brexit thread
-Everything else thread (rename ipecac's and merge sweeden)

I prefer one, two and three threads in order. The original thread is getting too long so if we do actually go with one thread I would merge everything else and call it part 2.

[BRickAstley]

Since activity started up in this thread again with politics, and there wasn't really any strong consensus on forum organization, I went with the simple solution.  Here's a politics subforum, public and open at present, we'll see if that ever needs to change.

I also split out the last few politics posts from this thread, to leave this one as meta-discussion around organizing and such.  And I left the old original thread here and locked.  I suggest new threads here for any particular topics.

Sorry for being away and not chiming in on this, but to close the loop, i'm in approval of the solution as it's been implemented so far.

[Boro]

Guess the rule of law thing was just election posturing?