Whats the position on polls?
Should there be a new guideline whereby a poster puts up a maximum of two polls and no more for a month.
I don't know about anyone else, but there are nearly as many polls as threads here now and all mostly from the one poster.
It's making me dizzy
Mods what do ye think?
Yep I defo think a limit should be put on polls, arcadegame2004 has gone mad posting polls. Theres 6 in the first page!!!
A couple of thoughts as to how this could be limited?
I thought about perhaps :
1) No poll on a "general topic" which has a poll on teh first page without first clearing with a moderator. (e.g. IRA, Palestine/Israel, War on Iraq, Referendum etc.)
or the more draconian :
2) No poll without clearing with a moderator
...but I haven't even discussed any of this with the other mods...who may prefer to leave it the way it is for all I know.
But please....reasonable suggestions only.
Brown (or other-coloured) envelopes to the usual address please : /dev/null
I would go with 2 - moderator approval - right across boards.ie. While, I've been known to have post a few polls myself, at least I try to cover as many points of view as possible, in a graduated scale from 1 to 5, not 1,4,2,5,3, not 1,5 not 1,2,3 (when the scale extends to 5).
There are just too many people out there that spam polls, without thinking.
Hi moderators and users of this forum.
Seeing this thread in politics this morning when its probably more suited to somewhere else.
I'm wondering if a sticky thread might be in order in the politics forum for links to threads elsewhere that aren't necessarally politically related but that would interest and might generate a post or two from the regulars in the politics board.
If people see a debate of note on another forum then they could link to it and give a brief description of what it's about.
Just a thought.
How about a News forum under Politics, where the thread starter doesn't have to comment on the article? I wanted to post this story for example, but according to the rules I'd have to comment on it, and I really don't want to --I just though it might interest other people, and it's political, and there's nowhere else to post it.
I don't think there's a need for a sub-forum.
Within reason, we've no major problem with people posting articles (with [ARTICLE] at the start of the topic) "sans comment". We're somewhat more wary of anyone doing this as their first post (as it smacks of advertising), but for anyone who has clearly been around a while, just make sure its noticeable in the subject and you'll be fine.
Also...isn't there an entirely seperate news forum now anyway?
explain to me this article thing...
whats the difference to posting a an article with or without the [article] title
when ya moved the mobo racist/homophobe thread to music it died....
i too would like to post political questions without commenting, cos i'd prefer to hear other peoples thoughts on a subject rather then a reaction to mine?
The idea behind it is that if ppl feel there is stuff important enough to post as some sort of "discussionless" content, it gives them the ability to do so.
It kinda marks an intent that you aren't really interested in discussing what you've posted....which may or may not determine whether or not other ppl will bother posting responses to it.
The idea for [Article] and [announcement] arose (I think) out of the RTS guys posting stuff up here about their latest meeting, event or whatever, and then after a couple of posts coming up with something along the lines of "I didn't really want to discuss this anyway...just wanted to let ppl know about X".
As I said...I'm going from memory, but I think Swiss brought up the idea with gandalf and myself that we should allow this stuff as long as its clearly marked...and as long as it doesn't subsequently turn into a big "rash" of announcement and article postings.
Our general stance is that this is a discussion forum, so we're somewhat wary of encouraging ppl to use it for other purposes, but like I said...as long as the volume is reasonable, and the stuff is clearly marked ....
Aren't they the same thing tho? Ppl who post up that they agree with you, obviously have the same (or similar) thoughts. Ppl who disagree with you end up explaining their own thoughts.
Personally speaking, I generally dislike the stance of "tell me your thoughts on X, but I'm not telling you mine", because I don't see it as being conducive to discussion (which is what I see as the major function of the board). Maybe I'm wrong....but I really don't get how ppl can be interested in a discussion that they don't want to participate in....and I don't get how you can participate in a discussion without taking a position in one way or another.
Fair enough the rules dictate that if a thread goes of topic it will be closed;
I would, however, like to ask gandalf why was the Paisley thread closed considering the final post made on it was to do with the original topic, ie the putting of arms beyond use?
Probably because Mods get bored too
Many discussions taking place here also bore me to tears but I recognise that people having a discussion is their own business and it is boorish to shut it down mid-flow.
Perhaps in order to make threads more clear posts that are merely repeat opinions posted before are to be deleted.
Alot depends on the vision for this board. Should it be the place were everyone just post whatever their think about certain topic related to politics? Should it be the place were constructive discussions are to be held? Place to be heard?