# New Forum Suggestion, Part CCLXXIX **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [February 21, 2005, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-forum-suggestion-part-cclxxix/291202 "2005-02-21T17:26:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 20
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2005, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-forum-suggestion-part-cclxxix/291202/20 "2005-02-23T10:03:58Z")
No. At least, it hasn’t proved to be so in practice. I don’t know where you get “several simultaneous threads all on the same subject” from anyway. There is the formal debate thread, and then there is (possibly, but not necessarily) a thread where people are discussing the debate. That’s two, not several. One is an actual debate, and the other is what we currently have. With respect to a poster taking a break because he feels overwhelmed, that’s a fine solution if a thread is indeed a pile-on. But what this idea tries to achieve is elimination of the pile-on to start with. If a thread comes to the point where someone feels overwhelmed and tensions rise, that’s not a debate — it’s a struggle to see who can make the most noise. It might be a Great Topic, or a Great Free-For-All, but it isn’t a very Great Debate. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-forum-suggestion-part-cclxxix/291202)._