Would it be possible to get a climate change tag added for discussions around the topic? I think it would be a benefit for organization and I doubt I’m the only one interested judging by the discussion in the current speculation thread.
Also, as a newer member, I’m not entirely sure which forum is appropriate for current event stuff around weather and climate (e.g. the heat wave in the western US right now). Is that a Great Debate debate? A Misc and Personal stuff? IMHO?
It depends on how the discussion is framed. Off the top of my head, I can envision threads on that topic that would fit well in MPSIMS (“Here’s the latest news about the heat wave”), IMHO (“How is the heat wave affecting you?”), FQ (“How does this heat wave compare, in intensity and duration, to historical ones?”), P&E (“What should the federal and state governments do about the current heat wave?”), or the BBQ Pit (“F%$# this heat, and f%$# the people who made it happen”).
Thanks for clarifying. MPSIMS it is.
Since you’re new, here’s one long-time user’s (but definitely not a mod) take on it …
Our categories are partly about which topics are in-scope for discussion, but much more than that, they are about the rules applicable to what you can post as a topic and as a response. e.g. …
-
In FQ the topic must be a factually answerable question, and the responses must be actual factual answers sourced from personal expertise or ideally from cites that are included along wth the posters’ analysis of those cites. After a few posts those rules soften a bit, but we’re serious about first responses being the factual real meal deal from folks with actual expertise.
-
The exact same question can be asked in IMHO, but the answers are expected to be mostly anecdata and thoughtful speculation, not cites.
-
The exact same question can be asked in the Pit, and the answers can be invective-filled comments about how dumb the question is, or about how dumbly society is coping with whatever you’ve so wisely asked about. With gratuitious sniping at the other posters in the thread with whom you disagree.
-
One oddity is that MSPSIMS is used for “Breaking news”. That’s arguably not a great fit in terms of category, but here we are. A thread tagged as “breaking news” is limited to cites and explanations of published news about the event. Not one’s speculation, or political commentary or … about the societal or human response to the event. or at least not much. Moderation is especailly fussy in threads with the breaking news tag. The intent is sort of to produce a long-lasting historical record of how the world’s understanding of event X evolved as it was happening.
As to climate-ish things, breaking news will apply the next time we get a huge killing heat wave or storm surge or riots over some UN meeting or …
Yeah, I hadn’t really wandered into MPSIMS before which is why I think I was struggling with where it would fit if I just wanted to discuss that it was happening. My fall back was going to be the Pit and then end with insulting our collective intelligence for letting things get to this point.
So I guess I’m sort of getting the hang of things? Anyway, thanks for elaborating!
My vote is that a typical climate change topic belongs in IMHO. Because “What do you all think about [whatever event or theory or statistic or expectation or …]?” is perfect IMHO fodder. Responses are expected to be polite, but wide-ranging in content, POV, and expertise. Everyone’s opinion is welcome; both the experts and the non. But jerks will be asked to shut up, leave, or both.
Due to politically motivated FUD and noise, there are very few facts about climate change that are not under dispute. Making FQ problematic. If it’s a big news event that will have ongoing coverage for weeks and months, then it’s probably MPSIMS+Breaking News. Not one or the other, but both.
E.g. The wildfires that destroyed Alta Dena in SoCal where one such event. All the other CA wildfires, including Oakland a few years ago, did not have the staying power to rate “breaking news” status. They got reported, discussed a bit, and set aside in the neverending rush of new news.
Makes sense to me. Not sure I completely understand the breaking news distinction though. It seems like it requires some anticipation of how much discussion and/or longevity a particular topic will have?
But I’ll hang around MPSIMS a bit and hopefully get a better feel for it.
Quoting from the MPSIMS rules specifically for breaking news (And please note, I am NOT a moderator for the forum), the biggest issue is to strictly avoid political and religious jabs.
Unfortunately, since these types of threads commonly involve hot-button issues, they often fall prey to hijacks and rants about political, religious or other emotionally charged subjects. MPSIMS is not the place for such comments, which detract from the usefulness of breaking-news threads. If you wish to use a current event as a springboard for a commentary about a hot-button issue, please post it in Great Debates or the Pit. You may post a link to your GD or Pit post in MPSIMS, but don’t use that as an excuse to rehash your argument.
Exactly as above, we’ll often have a Breaking news thread for a subject, a P&E thread for the same event to talk politics/etc. about it, and often a Pit thread for those who need to rant (often with good justification!) about the situation and/or the efforts to spin it.
Speaking as an FQ moderator, facts being under dispute doesn’t change that they’re facts. We are allowed to discuss the facts of climate change in FQ. Because they’re facts.
I can probably set up an automatic tag for climate change, I’ll check tomorrow morning.
Meanwhile, tag: climate-change