Reasons like you find it strangely flat? OK. But some people are actually interested in discussing the minutiae of electioneering and that’s for whom the forum was actually made.
Aren’t you worried that a “Politics” forum would leave GD with less interesting terrain?
The forum was an interesting and worthwhile experiment. I think it failed.
The threads were entirely too focused, on a particular race or state. There was very little digression; there were very few hijacks (either intentionally or from the natural flow).
Threads just felt odd without that flow. I don’t think that such a narrowly focused forum is good for the board.
(Whether or not the forum is recreated in 2012, I think the idea of closing the 2010 one and merging the threads into GD is good, and should probably become the tradition if biennial U.S. Election forums become traditional.)
Yeah, I gotta admit I was doubtful going in and I think my doubts were justified.
That forum should have drawn me like Elvis to peanut butter. Yet it didn’t.
Things that defined me last year:
Yet I was rarely there and when I was the discussions were dull and flat. It was pointless. I think the idea is fatally flawed. In terms of US politics at this point all potential GD topics ARE politicized. Cal up there mentioned ‘existence of God’ as a matter for GD and not politics. But religion is so fundamental a part of current American political discourse that it’s a factor in most campaigns one way or another. Same for science issues, sociological issues, and everything except maybe Star Destroyer vs Enterprise.
Essentially, all that was done was to create a forum where threads could be created that were boring and lifeless. Best to leave them with their other brethren in Great Debates from here on out.
Apparently **Frank **and **Jonathan Chance **also found it “odd” and “flat” as well as “boring and lifeless”, “too focused”, even “pointless”. This despite their avowed interest in electioneering.
I don’t deny that some people liked and used the forum. As you said, the statistics alone support that observation. But it simply didn’t catch on and produce the volume and quality of discussion that was predicted (or hoped for, if you’d rather). What the stats do not demonstrate are the reasons the rest of us left it out in the cold. As **Frank **said, this was an interesting and worthwhile experiment – that failed.
And I for one am not calling for the expansion of Election(s) into Politics. Removing all politics from GD (ignoring for the sake of discussion how one could even make that division) would indeed sap GD of much of its special value. It’s all *meh *to me if the forum is renewed or not, but I’ll likely not be reading it or contributing to it. Just MHO, I know. One data point among a universe of data. Take it as being worth exactly what you paid for it.
Well, I’m curious what the admins thought would mark a “successful” experiment.
Do you think that if it’s mandate was broadened to “American Politics” it would address yours and Jonathon Chance’s problem with it? Would that make it less one-dimensional and still keep it from sucking life out of GD?
If you’re asking me, I of course have no way of knowing what “the admins” would consider successful.
One admin posted above, declaring that the line between politics and debate (for purposes of forum choice anyway) is too ambiguous to allow a clear demarcation, and thus there is a vanishingly small chance of inaugurating a pure “Politics Forum”. But this does not address your curiosity.
The mod who posted above seems to believe that the forum will be renewed for 2012. This doesn’t address the matter directly either. So I guess, on that score, we’ll wait and see.
As for broadening Elections into Politics, especially if weighted toward the highly entertaining American version, IMHO that would indeed inject some vigor. But as noted above, this can only be at the expense of GD. I believe this would be a net loss.
The problem with having both Politics and GD forums is that there will constantly be parallel and overlapping threads in both. That’s why Elections was parsed out so narrowly in the first place.
Again, I would prefer all my debates to be found in a single forum. (Politics, and discussions of the same, must by their very nature be debates. Or else they are merely affirmations.) I think SDMB users can manage to pick out the threads they want to open, be they political or not. The worst case scenario would be opening a thread, reading a few posts, and deciding it wasn’t for me. No big whoop. Close and move on. If I have to scroll a bit further down the page to reach a thread that either IS or ISN’T political (to suit my preference of the day), so be it; I could live with that. Having to open and scan two fora to see if there are discussions of [name your topic *du jour *-- gay marriage, abortion, guns, “Obamacare”, et cetera] is much less appealing to me.
Yeah, I didn’t want you to guess what the mods were thinking. Re-reading Marley’s post I see there might some agreement with your guys complaint in the mod circle, as he notes one possibility is “broadening the focus” of the forum.
An “elections” forum would probably follow the election cycle. I’d bet it was very busy for 4 to 6 months every 24 months. During it’s busy period, it’s convenient to find all threads in one spot and not have to sort through other stuff looking for (trying to remember for me) what you’ve posted in.
The staff has been kicking around ideas for the forum but no consensus has emerged. The original plan was to close the forum after the election but we’ve been reluctant to do that as long as there was still SOME activity. The line of least resistance at this point is to rename the forum “Elections,” so that’s what I’m going to do. We’ll see what happens. If traffic drops off to nothing we may just merge the forum back into GD.
Elections are every 2 years. Nowadays, running for office starts immediately following an election. Money is being raised and attempts to gather backing begin. There is very little time between elections.
There are lots of stories in the news about Obama’s chances and who will run against him. The Repub candidates are already dancing for attention.
Well from the PoV of many non-Americans, it was nice not to have GD submerged in purely Americana political threads as tends to happen during your election times.
Rather than politics, which I agree is impossible to distinguish from Debates, I would suggest making it US Elections. No other countries’ elections get that much discussion otherwise, and no other single topic really tends to drown out GD at its most intense.
During the intense periods, it is nice to have GD not be effectively 100% USA elections.
I agree completely… The only two other countries whose politics seem to appear on the boards with any degree of regularity are the UK and Australia, and theres’ probably less than a dozen posters on the boards who regularly participate in those threads. Since almost no-one else cares, there’s only likely to be one Australian/UK political thread open at any given time (and probably none for weeks on end); it’s not like US Politics that seems to be nearly all-pervasive for some reason.
So yeah, a “US Elections” or “US Politics” forum (and an easy definition of whether or not it’s politics: Does it involve a Politician or Political Party? If yes, then it’s politics.) would be a great idea and one I’m all in favour of.
Sorry, I respectfully disagree.
I just don’t see the difficulty in scrolling past threads that one isn’t interested in opening. That applies whether the disinterest is due to a post’s parochial nature (US - centric or otherwise), its topic (generally political, election-specific, or whatever), or its poster (frankly some posters just annoy me, while others intrigue me).
I would rather (me, me, it’s all about ME!!) scroll down a single page to select from all current debates rather than have to open two different forums only to find roughly parallel if not outright identical threads in both. We’ve seen that kind of overlap already, as I recall.
As for parsing Politics out of Elections (or do you mean parsing Politics out of Debates?) by reference to a politician or political party, I think that would prove to be an unworkable standard. We’ll spend more time arguing about what forum to use than about the supposed substance of the thread.
It’s not so much “Difficult” as it is “Frustrating”. And often there just aren’t any topics to scroll down to; the overwhelming number of political threads has a Chilling Effect on non-political discussion in GD, at least IMHO. I’ve really liked having a “Politics”-type forum where the most egregious of that stuff can go.
Why? It seems pretty straightforward to me.
So what is next? A religion forum, because there is to much god talk in GD? Because we all know, the two things that should never be discussed it Great Debates are politics and religion.
The major difference is that A) There’s not that many Super-Religious posters on the boards (and if there are, they’ve generally figured it’s not worth arguing with other people about) and B) Religion is a heck of a lot more “Universal” (and accessible as a discussion topic) than American politics.
Also, with only a few notable exceptions, “Religion” doesn’t randomly start to pop up in unrelated threads for the most part.
ETA: I see they’ve renamed the forum “Elections”. Hurrah! 
I believe it was done back on the 22nd.