Suggestion for new forum: Current Affairs.

I know the SDMB is reluctant to include new fora on a whim, But I respectfully ask that you guys take this into consideration.

When I’m reading the news, checking the debates, reading other online sources, there are many times I think “I’d like to talk about this with the other Dopers”, but it doesn’t really fit any forum*. It’s not pitworthy, it’s not for GQ, sometimes it’s something for GD or the two noise fora**. A Current Affairs forum could include a lot of stuff dispersed all over the Dope. Especially the RO threads.

*Which is also why I think we have the RO threads in the Pit
**MPSIMS and IMHO (I can’t never figure out the difference between these two)

I endorse this proposal, with the caveat that what constitutes “current affairs” should be almost entirely at the discretion of the original poster, flagrant breaches alone excepted.

Charlie, I think things like that would go into MPSIMS–that seems to be the place for random posts. IMHO is for when you are seeking an opinion on something (or it’s supposed to be).

No, sorry. No new forums at this time.

Well, that sounds pretty lowbrow, if you ask me.
(d&r)

IMHO: You’re soliciting information or opinions on something.
MPSIMS: Read this post about this event that happened to me/another person. If you’re soliciting anything, it’s laughs or sympathy or condolences.

Of course, it doesn’t help that some people post stuff that doesn’t really belong in MPSIMS in MPSIMS. For example, I’ve seen “how do I fix this?”-type computer questions posted there. I can only assume people are too intimidated by GQ to leave the comfort of the chatty forum.

Can you give examples of a news topic you would post about, and what kind of discussion you have in mind? I’m not sure what kind of discussion there could be that doesn’t fit the scope of our existing forums.

Out of interest, why is it you’re posting with apparent authority? Have you been promoted and we haven’t been told yet?

I think Liberal is just being cute or sarcastic, and thinks that passes for humour around here.

We’re always faced with the question of organizing the forums by topic (art, science, history, psychology, etc.) Generally speaking, we thought back on day one (and haven’t changed our minds) that such classificiations don’t realy fit Cecil’s columns nor the kind of discussions we want to see. Hence, we organized based on type of discussion: debate, soliciting opinions, sharing events, flaming, praising or criticizing Cecil’s column, etc. The only exception really is Cafe Society, which has a topic basis.

We’re not opposed to adding another topic-based discussion, but we’d need to (a) be sure that there are enough threads to sustain a whole forum and (b) someone to moderate it. I think the idea has merit, and we’ll do some internal discussion amongst the mods.

Meanwhile, someone who’s in favor of it, could you please go through some fixed time period (the last week, the last ten days, the last month, whatever) and look at the thread titles in GQ, GD, IMHO and MPSIMS to see how many threads (out of how many) might fit such a forum? A little data might be helpful: f’rinstance, if the answer is 0.001%, we’d say that there’s not enought volume for a new forum.

I’m in favour of it, but my concern is that it would turn into the American Politics forum. Having said that, if it kept all the political discussion out of the other forums, I’d see that a net benefit for everyone.

I think any topic that is in the realm of current affairs will nicely fit in the forums we already have.

Since I proposed it, I’ll do it.
Maybe it’s just because whenever I venture into MPSIMS I find the signal to noise ratio to low to sift through it all.

I’ll subscribe to this thread and revive it when I have some statistics.

I’m partly in favour but what Martini Enfield said is also my concern

Nah. I just read the ATMB forum regularly.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8663406&postcount=16

Well, that was quite rude, especially from the author of this.

I wasn’t claiming you were wrong. I just thought it might confuse any newbies.

You are correct, Liberal, that was rude and inexcusably so. I apologize, sincerely. I was wrong to ahve said that.

Recall that you said:

… and I was rude in response. Again, my apologies. What I should have said, of course, was:

Liberal: when you speak as though you were a moderator or administrator, that’s called “playing junior mod” and is a violation of our rules. You will kindly refrain from doing this again. This is an Official Warning.

Haha!

I think, if anything, we should get rid of a couple of forums, not add new ones. Not that my opinion is at all authoritative; mostly I just wanted to post to point and laugh at Lib, but thought it better to add at least some content.

Five’ll get you ten, you’ll get no warning for it. :smiley:

Is pointing and laughing against the rules now?

I dunno about ATMB, but you can do all the pointing and laughing your little heart desires in here. :wink:

Back on the subject - what a crazy idea! - I think this idea has considerable merit.

Some examples.

Michael Moore served with subpoena re Cuba trip. The only reason this is in GD is that it’s political. What will happen now? is not a good question for a GQ thread, and it fits in neither IMHO or MPSIMS. It’s not really a political debate, however, except in that there will be an inevitable right/left split on the subject of Michael Moore.

You know, [del]all[/del] [del]most[/del] [del]many[/del] some of BrainGlutton’s threads would be better in that new forum.

Similarly, Military needs until Novermber to evaluate Iraq surge effect. That could go into GQ, but the political discussion that would inevitably follow would bounce it from there.

Explain the vitriol directed towards Jesse Jackson, please would be a natural for such a new forum.

With luck, the newly created culture of a new forum, as people tentatively test what would now be acceptable, might also shift the tone so that it’s less toxic. No guarantees, certainly, but I’ve seen changing fora have a great impact on the tone of and the participants in discussions on other boards.