"This type of debate really belongs in the Senate, not the YJCC".

The discussion is not about not being able to follow the abortion thread from one place to another, its about the repercussions of moving a certain kind of thread to a different forum for the wrong reasons.

 

(is there something wrong with two or three people dominating a discussion? If they like to hash the issues out...)?


Actually, yes. A lot of the time, if I click on thread about a political story/news event, and see long quoted paragraphs from the same 2 or 3 users, I'll stay away. I know you can't make a rule against that, but it is one of the annoyances in the JCC.

 

My worry is that my point will get lost amongst the shuffle of the larger discussion between the other users. However, this only pertains to (national/international) political discussions: if it involves local politics, or it's a thread about sports or some form of pop culture, I'll dig right in.

 

Election night results threads: No. The Obama administration thread (which I started in the JCC ): Yes.

 

You really don't see that its the same people who make and post in these "debate" threads? They aren't even debate threads, as differing opinions or out-crowders are not welcome. There's pretty much an exclusive sub-board on the YJCC

 

That's the point I'm questioning. What are the repercussions. What difference does it make if the thread is moved, rightly or wrongly? If the thread were locked, I'd understand.

Yes I understand that but what is preventing the JCC people from just posting in the thread in the Senate? Sure there will be some contamination from the Senate rabble but the same JCC people you all know and love can keep posting in the thread if they wish. I recall this issue came up in a Focus Group we had a few years ago with Senate people and JCC people. Perhaps the best thing to do is to lock the thread in the JCC but provide a link to the open thread in the Senate so that JCC people who were participating or might be interested in participating can keep posting in the thread.

 

I'm not sure if this has been pointed out, but some in the JCC see these sort of contentious threads as a sort of perverse entertainment, particularly anything involving religion and OZK. This sort of lightheartedness can do a lot to dispell tension in a serious JCC thread.

Anyone wanting to start an issues thread in the JCC knows that it has the potential to blow up in their face, pictures being posted, quotes from various TV shows and movies being made and not to mention observers like me "passing snacks".

IMHO, the only really serious threads we have over there are the ones where people ask for advice. And trying to antagonise people in those sorts of threads when they ask for support about something personal isn't very nice.

 

I don't think it's that much of a problem.

 

This.
But it's actually why most of the time the threads, as annoyingly idiotic as the subject matter is IMHO, are okay. Who really cares if 5 people basically say "hi" to each other in 12000 words? Especially when one of them is sometimes Jello.

The only real problem really only occurs when people stop debating the topic and start debating each other's sentences - which has never been anything but 500-word-version of "you're an idiot" (or worse). But since nobody actually says that, it must be allowed, or else!
That, or when somebody thinks religions are protected from anything. They aren't.

 

and

We currently have a reasonably fresh-faced number of mods in the JCC, yet between them have a significant number of years of JCC membership. I'd be tempted to have a fresh attempt at moderating certain types of threads and see how far the JCC has matured in recent years, rather than push what could become sensible threads into the Senate.

You could always edit or lock after things started getting nasty, but to do it before things got out of hand could be viewed as over-moderation, and slightly insulting to the current JCC community.

 

You disappoint me, Sir.

 

... people actually think the thing was not nasty at all? I thought we were just haggling over whether it was lock/move-worthy or JCC-acceptable nastiness. Wow.




(and hal, technically that probably means "the community of the forum that's named JCC", and isn't RAS Syndrome )

 

exactly

Hal should be ashamed that a German is explaining English to him!

 

I had quite a good time reading through the thread...but I really don't see why this is any sort of a big deal. Maybe it should have been left, maybe not. Perhaps the mods should be a little more lenient about these sorts of things to account for change in the JCC culture. Beyond that, I'm not sure what there is to argue about.

 

Abortion is just one of the few touchy subjects that never ends well in JCC.

I don't have an axe to grind and am happy to accept any serious thread that can't find a home in the JCC. I don't know where the particular thread in question really belongs, but abortion threads don't end well anywhere. The only value I see in moving it to the Senate is that we're very comfortable with threads that don't end well.

If I could propose something fun, how about a traveling abortion thread that gets to spend a few days in every forum, spreading a little cheer and conversation before being asked to move on?

 

Like a virus.

 

I like your style!

 

Hell, even I would post in a travelling abortion thread!

 

Best...idea....ever

 

As long as each time the traveling abortion thread leaves the forum, it leaves an STD thread behind.

 

Brilliant. There should be more travelling threads - help break down those psychological barriers to posting in a familiar thread with people you know but on a different forum.

 

I like that idea..

 

On one hand I want to say "this." Let the cockroaches feed off each other. On the other hand, its not fair. If the policy is SRS threads are allowed, and redundancy is not allowed, they need to be more outer-user friendly.

And too much name calling on OZK. He's usually the guy taking the other side against the other four people. If the other four can paragraph/wiki rape him, and he's the only one with the patience to do it back, he gets four times as space.