Right now, I'm leaning against a Politics thread, but I'm persuadable. Except for one thing -- there's gotta be camouflage. I don't care what it is (though Las Vegas has a certain appeal). I don't want people seeking us out just to talk politics -- for my reasons, well, what Tina said.

It's another issue, but I doubt that I'd post, or even subscribe. But conflict avoidance is one of my faults.

I'm against it for the reasons stated by most everyone: anti-proliferation, spillover effect.

Also, I think it feels weird to me to build a thread where we can ghettoize a topic that makes people uncomfortable or unhappy. My discomfort comes because it seems like a group way of saying, "Keep away from us with your nasty talk we don't like." Or as Sean succinctly put it, "Get offa my lawn."

Quick suggestionfor the initial proposal before I get on big silver plane and go where it's cold.

How about we open the politics thread for a trial period, say 3 months. See how it goes, what the interest level is, etc. At that point, a discussion could be had as to whether or not it's of interest to keep around, or if it was not a popular as once thought, it gets closed.

oh damn. I meant to get all my thoughts out. The current acrimony isn't a result of politics talk, in my opinion. It's most likely a cause of people not really liking each other as much as before.

Also, I know that some people say Jen K left because of X or Y, but in the absence of her coming in to explain, can we not continually bring up the reasons she left? I'm sure Allyson being kinda a bitch was part of it. But I sense, and from David's comment I infer, that it was one of a few reasons. So I am weirded out that we are attributing motives to her without her presence especially since there is no way to confirm the reality of our assumptions about those motives.

How about we open the politics thread for a trial period, say 3 months. See how it goes, what the interest level is, etc. At that point, a discussion could be had as to whether or not it's of interest to keep around, or if it was not a popular as once thought, it gets closed.

Not bad idea, Aimee. In the end, it being your proposal, you'll be the one to ultimately write the actual verbage of the ballot item.

Also, though it's tangential to the current item up for discussion...

The current acrimony isn't a result of politics talk, in my opinion.

I agree.

Also, I know that some people say Jen K left because of X or Y, but in the absence of her coming in to explain, can we not continually bring up the reasons she left?

I also very strongly agree with this. Bringing up Jen K, and bringing up other nameless people and how they may or may not feel, really is not a terrihbly effective way to discuss things. Invariably, any interpretation of the viewpoints involved is hopelessly polluted by the interpreter.

Ooh, Empress, a realistic compromise solution! How novel! See, I knew Buffistas were up to the challenge.

Three months would certainly take us through a lot of the run-up to conventions and such (whenever those are), so if things look to be getting really acrimonious and unresolveable, then we'd be in a perfect place to pull the plug.

I don't like the idea of a three month trial run for a thread, any thread. No point in opening a thread if we think there isn't enough steam to keep it running (that was part of my No War Thread position).

We have precendence for opening and closing threads though. We closed the F2F thread last year and the reopened it a few months later.

The goodbye to any given year thread also has a closing date.

But a trial is something different, no?

Yes, it is something different. I think it's a good idea though. Mainly I was making the point that we already have threads that have a limited life span.