For me it's a bit of both. Plus it's the not wanting to interrupt fun natter for war talk, too.

For example, yesterday there was a bit of (very polite despite containing differing opinions) discussion in Natter. It dawned on me this morning though, that something I said I might not have been really clear about. I thought to post about it in Natter - but natter was full of snow talk, and fun stuff, and because of the high volume of natter, I have no reason to believe the people to whom I was talking would even see my post. I couldn't see interrupting the conversation for a post that was long off the table by then.

Can natter be interrupted? I think that a war thread is as necessary as a politics thread or a weather thread. It's a topic a lot of people care about, but not something that warrants its own thread. Unless it does begin to "take over" natter, in which case the subject can be opened up again.

I think Plei's suggestion is perhaps the best one. I thought a good long time and was weighing for and then against a specific thread. And I finally have to concede that I don't want a specific thread. I do agree that people like Susan, and myself upon occasion, need a safe, supportive place to discuss and inquire. But I don't think a War thread on the Phoenix board is the most appropriate nor the most effective place. The discussion will bleed into Natter no matter what, but as Cindy just posted, when the conversation turns people will be reluctant to bring it up again. And those (like me, oftentimes) who are willfully if temporarily blindered will try to keep the convo from turning back to war. So, Natter's not the best solution, either.

I really like Plei's mail list idea.

Nothing like a weather thread to start some name calling and post deleting.

I like the mailing list idea too (as someone who has no intention of participating). I think it's really even safer than the board, since someone would have to work pretty hard to trip over it and start trolling. I can see how it might not work for people who don't like or really use mailing lists, though. Or who don't want the traffic in their Inbox.

While I understand wanting a safe, supportive place to discuss, my feeling that a thread about our foreign policy will not stay safe and supportive for long, despite our best intentions. IJS.

The overflowing inbox thing can be gotten past by just a notice every 25-50-100 new posts, and the receiver can set up that number. I know the interface is ugly, compared to Phoenix's elegant beauty. But I do think a list is the best solution.

I think the mailing list is an excellent idea, and does avoid the troll issue.

And YG does have a webonly option, although it is admittedly more clunky than this board.

Also, the troll issue, which others have mentioned. The political climate here is strongly left/progressive (no offense intended to the community members who aren't of that persuasion), and I think we'd be seen as a prime target for trollers who are both strongly to the right and not possessed of the kind of civility we cherish here.

Wrod, speaking as someone who is a bit right of center on a number of issues.

I like the idea of a mailing list, even though I doubt I'd sign up for one.

Sneaking in during a break in packing.

I oppose a War Thread on the grounds that there are many many many other places to discuss foreign policy and politics. We're not Table Talk.

I'm suspicious of such a thread for just this reason. I've lurked on several political-type boards. While Buffistas can be trusted to be polite and respectful, would we attract newbies who can't be?

If we want to be truly obscure, how about The Norfolk Thread, for the location of a major U.S. naval base?