A place for political discussions

[Goon]

Someone mentioned the possibility of having a forum for political debates, kind of like the place for community and other discussion not related to Fighting Sioux debates. Obviously we don't want a moronathon or a name calling place but a place for civil discussions.

[siouxnami]

Someone mentioned the possibility of having a forum for political debates, kind of like the place for community and other discussion not related to Fighting Sioux debates. Obviously we don't want a moronathon or a name calling place but a place for civil discussions.

Somehow I doubt that the discussion will stay civil, but a place to discuss would be good, just because it would hopefully keep this crap out of the other threads.

[SiouxMD]

Somehow I doubt that the discussion will stay civil, but a place to discuss would be good, just because it would hopefully keep this crap out of the other threads.

I seem to remember another board that created a new forum specifically to "keep this crap out of the other threads". It backfired.

Personally...I vote against a "Political Forum". Nothing inflames people faster than politics, religion or the Bison.

[Sioux-cia]

Personally...I vote against a "Political Forum". Nothing inflames people faster than politics, religion or the Bison.

I totally agree. I vote NO.

[PCM]

I totally agree. I vote NO.

Me too.

[Chewey]

Yes, I agree with a big NO. It would be a name-calling fest and you know that it would not take long for it to become infested with anti-nickname loons. Pretty soon, everyone would just get so frustrated that they'd stop even accessing it. It would be one thing if people could keep it civil -- no Hitler analogies and no "anti-nickname loons" like what I say all of the time -- but that's not possible. If people were able to keep things to the Disraeli -- Gladstone level of discourse, where there was positive discussion and the insults were subdued but very witty, it would be one thing. There are a few that rise to this level -- Scott M, PCM, Chief Illini, Goon, HockeyMom, maybe even Gothmog, and some others -- but I am certainly not one of them.

[jimdahl]

Despite the consensus so far being against, I can explain why I've forbidden it in the past.

Everyone here is a Sioux fan and for the most part we manage to get along talking about our team. Disagreements may form over whether to canonize or fire Hakstol, but it rarely leads to true personal conflict between people.

If people used this community to debate politics, I think it would be much more likely that someone would develop a real personal dislike for someone else, based on political arguments. My fear is that such conflict would make it tougher for them to have a civil conversation about Sioux hockey, and that the political debates and conflicts would seep into and harm the community in its discussions about the intended topic, your UND Fighting Sioux.

[GeauxSioux]

Despite the consensus so far being against, I can explain why I've forbidden it in the past.

Everyone here is a Sioux fan and for the most part we manage to get along talking about our team. Disagreements may form over whether to canonize or fire Hakstol, but it rarely leads to true personal conflict between people.

If people used this community to debate politics, I think it would be much more likely that someone would develop a real personal dislike for someone else, based on political arguments. My fear is that such conflict would make it tougher for them to have a civil conversation about Sioux hockey, and that the political debates and conflicts would seep into and harm the community in its discussions about the intended topic, your UND Fighting Sioux.

I love politics and political discussions, but I don't want them here. There are plenty of places to engage in such conversations. I agree that some will be viewed in a different light when their political views are laid out on a message board. I have already witnessed some of that on the bridge collapse thread and the "what annoys you" thread. Let's keep this a forum for the discussion of UND and Grand Forks.

[ScottM]

If you want to "debate" politics, try USCHO, or a host of other sites. You'll find plenty of "debates" there. As much as I occasionally enjoy a good fight here, I don't see a reason to add a politics or current event forum that has little/nothing to do with Sioux athletics or UND in general.

[greenwinger_13]

NO NO NO politics!

[Hammersmith]

Despite the consensus so far being against, I can explain why I've forbidden it in the past.

Everyone here is a Sioux fan and for the most part we manage to get along talking about our team. Disagreements may form over whether to canonize or fire Hakstol, but it rarely leads to true personal conflict between people.

If people used this community to debate politics, I think it would be much more likely that someone would develop a real personal dislike for someone else, based on political arguments. My fear is that such conflict would make it tougher for them to have a civil conversation about Sioux hockey, and that the political debates and conflicts would seep into and harm the community in its discussions about the intended topic, your UND Fighting Sioux.

I know I'm a really just a visitor to your site, but I think this is exactly what happened over on anygivensaturday.com. Since the political forums were started over there, comments on the football and community forums that would've been seen as joking or teasing a year ago are now considered personal attacks depending on the parties involved. I think you've had the right idea so far, and I agree with the other posters who think a political section would be a bad idea.

Just my $0.02

[jimdahl]

I know I'm a really just a visitor to your site, but I think this is exactly what happened over on anygivensaturday.com. Since the political forums were started over there, comments on the football and community forums that would've been seen as joking or teasing a year ago are now considered personal attacks depending on the parties involved. I think you've had the right idea so far, and I agree with the other posters who think a political section would be a bad idea.

Just my $0.02

I appreciate the real-world example.

My concern is precisely that. If I'm continuously engaged in big political fights with you, I develop a predisposition to negative emotional reactions to your posts. When I see a post from you in the football forum, it's tough to shut off my politically formed opinion of you and restart from a neutral baseline.

As a Bison fan, you face a somewhat similar problem here. Some people classify you as a Bison fan, so approach your posts with a predisposition toward hostility based on previous interactions with Bison fans (even if the negative interaction wasn't with you, specifically). I'd be reasonably nervous about having people start labeling themselves with even more divisive labels.

[BIGSIOUX]

I appreciate the real-world example.

My concern is precisely that. If I'm continuously engaged in big political fights with you, I develop a predisposition to negative emotional reactions to your posts. When I see a post from you in the football forum, it's tough to shut off my politically formed opinion of you and restart from a neutral baseline.

As a Bison fan, you face a somewhat similar problem here. Some people classify you as a Bison fan, so approach your posts with a predisposition toward hostility based on previous interactions with Bison fans (even if the negative interaction wasn't with you, specifically). I'd be reasonably nervous about having people start labeling themselves with even more divisive labels.

There's worse labels than Bison?

I agree on the no political threads though, it has also done damage on d2football.com

[NORGE]

Don't we have enough politics to discuss between the NCAA and WCHA?

[Hammersmith]

I forgot to add in my previous post that some boards try to get around the problem by having each person use two userid's; one for the political forums and a regular one for everything else. Personally, I think it's probably more trouble than it's worth(especially for the admin), but it is an option.

[Cratter]

Personally...I vote against a "Political Forum". Nothing inflames people faster than politics, religion or the Bison.

Is that because people are passionate about their country and its issues?

I believe the world would be a better place is we all did more talking/discussing than "No Political Talk."

People might just see what the "other side" is thinking.

I am not saying there should be a political forums here. But politics run the world.

[Shawn-O]

...But politics run the world.

Actually, a strong case could be made for religion. And the line of politics and religion is pretty gray, at that.

[GeauxSioux]

Actually, a strong case could be made for religion. And the line of politics and religion is pretty gray, at that.

The Middle East is a prime example of the intertwining of religion and politics.

[Fetch]

It would be a nightmare to moderate & I have NO Passion for the Bison Good Bad or Otherwise

[Goon]

The Middle East is a prime example of the intertwining of religion and politics.

Yeah and it's working really well for them too...

[Hayduke]

Nope.

Politics and sports shouldn't mix.

There are plenty of other places to go and rant about politics.