So political discussions that grow naturally out of personal or show related issues will continue in Natter. There will be some natural draining, but not a ton of pressure to "take it to politics" at the first sign of political discussion?
Mal: Does.. um.. does this seem kind of tight? Kaylee: Shows off your backside.
'Shindig'
Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!
We open it up, we talks the talk, we votes, we shuts it down. This thread is to free up Bureaucracy for daily details as we hammer out the Big Issues towards a vote. Open only when a proposal has been made and seconded according to Buffista policy (Which we voted on!). If this thread is closed, hie thee to Bureaucracy instead!
Typo Boy - Apr 02, 2004 9:02:40 am PST #3632 of 10289
Calli: My people have a saying. A man who trusts can never be betrayed, only mistaken.Avon: Life expectancy among your people must be extremely short.
Kristen - Apr 02, 2004 9:03:56 am PST #3633 of 10289
Okay I'm confused.
Let's say a Buffista is trying to decide whether to have an abortion, and wants to bounce things off fellow Buffistas. Natter/Bitches/Unamerican, or Politics?
To my way of thinking, there's a big difference between "I want to discuss the issue of marriage/abortion/etc." and "I am getting married/considering having an abortion/etc." In the first instance, it's a political discussion where you're talking about an issue in a general sense. In the second, it's a personal matter that is happening in your life.
I mean, if I got a job on Angel tomorrow, I don't feel that I would have to limit my posting about that new job to only the Angel thread. I'd want to talk about it in Natter because that's where we talk about what's happening in our lives.
Fred Pete - Apr 02, 2004 9:10:31 am PST #3634 of 10289
Ann, that's a ferret.
Um, Lyra Jane has withdrawn the idea. Though based on the comments above, I'm more comfortable that personal-life matters that coincidentally involve political issues could be discussed outside Politics.
Kristen - Apr 02, 2004 9:13:02 am PST #3635 of 10289
Okay now I'm even more confused. I think I missed Lyra Jane's post.
Wolfram - Apr 02, 2004 9:16:28 am PST #3636 of 10289
Visilurking
So political discussions that grow naturally out of personal or show related issues will continue in Natter. There will be some natural draining, but not a ton of pressure to "take it to politics" at the first sign of political discussion?
There's rarely ever any pressure in Natter to take any discussion anywhere. I think I've seen movie discussions occassionally get the cough*moviethread*cough treatment, but for the most part politics that flow out of other issues will probably stay in Natter unless they get really involved at which point probably one of the conversants would suggest taking it to Politics.
To my way of thinking, there's a big difference between "I want to discuss the issue of marriage/abortion/etc." and "I am getting married/considering having an abortion/etc." In the first instance, it's a political discussion where you're talking about an issue in a general sense. In the second, it's a personal matter that is happening in your life.
Wrod. If I was considering an abortion, I'd want chocolate and hugs, not a debate. And if I was to marry my same-sex partner, I'd want congratulations and celebrations, not a debate.
Connie Neil - Apr 02, 2004 9:18:55 am PST #3637 of 10289
brillig
The personal implications of politics would most definitely fit in other threads. I'm seeing a dedicated Politics thread as being primarily theoretical. In fact, personal implications would probably be best discussed elsewhere--hey, I can dream--unless they clearly inform the person's political stand.
So far the arguments against the thread seem to boil down to
bad people may come, and
we can't be trusted to have a civil discussion about politics
What am I missing?
Topic!Cindy - Apr 02, 2004 9:20:32 am PST #3638 of 10289
What is even happening?
Kristen, Lyra made some suggestions here: Lyra Jane "Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!" Apr 2, 2004 8:32:24 am PST
Her third caveat was:
We become huge thread nannies and all political discussion goes there.
Fred Pete responded here: Fred Pete "Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!" Apr 2, 2004 8:55:06 am PST
And the how do we differentiate between life+a-dash-of-politics from politics conversation started from there.
Then LJ withdrew her 'net nanny' suggestion/request.
Wolfram - Apr 02, 2004 9:24:14 am PST #3639 of 10289
Visilurking
So far the arguments against the thread seem to boil down to bad people may come, and we can't be trusted to have a civil discussion about politics
thread proliferation/board capacity; outside the buffista scope; appropriate forums already exist for political discussion (Bitches, Natter, UnAm); first sign of the apocalypse
bon bon - Apr 02, 2004 9:25:34 am PST #3640 of 10289
It's five thousand for kissing, ten thousand for snuggling... End of list.
"bad people may come" is somewhat disingenous considering what happens when they do. And that having good people here is kind of the point.
Hil R. - Apr 02, 2004 9:26:24 am PST #3641 of 10289
Sometimes I think I might just move up to Vermont, open a bookstore or a vegan restaurant. Adam Schlesinger, z''l
So far the arguments against the thread seem to boil down to bad people may come, and we can't be trusted to have a civil discussion about politics
What am I missing?
Concentrating political discussion, even if civil, will lead to much higher collective board blood pressure, which could affect other threads.
Uncomfortable with ghettoizing a topic that's so closely intertwined with personal lives.