[JessicaS]

We removed political threads from FYT.<br><br>
How about we discuss having political party threads in W&P and making some sort of guidlines for that..if we can discuss it here nicely we might not have to add it to the rules if it is something everyone can deal with and the mods can work with and enforce through the current rules.

 

[Rainbow]

Why are our tribe threads gone?Sure there were a few mild problems- but there was also a lot of good there.

 

[Rainbow]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Nursing Mother</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;"><br>
Will conservatives be able to speak of important issues to them w/o being bomb-barded with strong opinions from another side?....and visa versa?</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Of course not :LOL But I would hope we can all be civil.

 

[JessicaS]

The threads were removed because BOTH sides were referring to other threads, boards and posters in a negative light. Both threads received repeated warnings and closings. This had been going on for months and is against the rules.<br><br>
I am hoping the political party threads will be able to continue without invasion from another party but they shouldn't exceed one thread per party. Otherwise the board would be bombarded in political party threads with everyone discussing amongst themselves and no one discussing with each other.<br><br>
Also, the debate aspect of the board would dissappear. Really the point of the boards are to discuss with each other so this is something we need to discuss amongst the board. Obviously the conservatives are outnumbered so they may have issues finding a way to discuss their views without being bombarded but this is all stuff we need to work out.<br><br>
I am not sure how well the political party threads will work but it is something I would like to keep going while this is all decided. Obviously, some people are going to want to invade those threads so it may be a bit hard to keep them OT but I guess we'll see.

 

[sadie_sabot]

It might help to refer to them as political tendencies instead of parties. I'm not really down with any political parties, but I am a lefty.<br><br>
Plus, there's sooo many different parties <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies/eyesroll.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="roll">

 

[Rainbow]

The way I see it, if on ANY subject there happens to be more on one side than teh other it doesn't mean that one side is bombarding the other. Rather there just happen to be more people with that particular opinion.<br><br>
I mean if I were on a conservative bent board and I talked about homosexuality or abortion I can EXPECT that there would be more people disagreeing than agreeing with me. That doesn't mean they are out to get me or smother me.

 

[Rainbow]

thanks for the explanation Abimommy... I didn't see the warnings. i knew some remarks had been around but I thought it had all been taken care of and ended. I was on teh ABB thread and it seemed to have totally moved on. So I wondered why it was being removed now. Got it though <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/smile.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="smile">

 

[chicagomom]

The difficulty with political party threads is who gets to decide where everyone fits in? If I am a progressive and disagree with another progressive, will I get kicked out of the progressive board? How much am I ‘allowed’ to disagree before I am no longer progressive? Witness Buchanan interviewing Nader in American Conservative magazine. Witness Catholics for Kerry. Two parties, and two labels (or three, including moderate/independent) just seems like a recipe for isolationism to me.<br><br>
I'm not saying we shouldn't have 'What do you like about Bush/Kerry/Nader/whoever?' threads. But it is offensive when someone says 'you're not progressive enough to participate in our discussion. Please, only people who agree with me may participate in this thread/board.' Politics is different from parenting topics, from spirituality; it is the public sphere, it is *the place* where we come together to discuss how we want to be governed.<br><br>
It seems to me that there are a fair number of people here who try to see both sides of an issue. Cordoning people off by political parties not only doesn’t work in this country, it actively disenfranchises people who are genuinely trying to create an alternative.<br><br>
It bugs me when some who call themselves conservative assume that if I am conservative I will support Bush, or be religious, or be Republican, or will agree with them on whatever. It seems to me that the two-party system just leaves so many people out, forces people into artificial categories, that it doesn’t leave room for genuine discussion. I hear this over and over again on this very board.<br><br>
I’d much rather see people from all political spectrums mount respectful arguments, and be able to disagree than say that we need little ‘safe’ areas where we can slap each other on the back politically without having to examine our own positions (or our candidates).<br><br>
Bipartisanship seems almost dead in this country right now, save for a few brave souls. I feel that the partisan climate of our country at present is <b>one of the biggest, most serious problems this country has</b>. It is a climate of victimhood – each group attacking the other, and ignoring the real problems within their own self-identified group. And both political parties privately decrying the lack of ‘unity’ in their own party (and sniggering at the lack of unity in the other’s).<br><br>
I think there is a significant (perhaps more silent) group who would jump up and cheer to see more politicians (and political discussions) reaching across the aisles, or even reaching across the seats within their own aisles. That doesn’t just mean finding common ground (though I do see a significant number of those discussions here too). It means hearing the other side, reading other sources, and learning how to disagree. I sincerely hope that the current partisan climate will not be reflected on these boards with the creation of little ‘safe’ houses where people can spout ideology without fear of ever being challenged.<br><br>
I am tremendously grateful to the moderators on these boards, for helping keep the discussions civil. I know your work is hard. But I think you are doing a good job. And I fear that if we dissolve into ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’ areas, or ‘Republican’ and ‘Democratic’ areas, the current, ugly climate of partisanship in this country will win and real discussion will end.<br><br>
My two cents.

 

[Arduinna]

there is plenty of other discussions happening besides "party threads". So I do not see any risk that having party threads will result in a lack of debate or discussion between people with different or even opposing views.<br><br>
having said that, I don't necessarily support the idea of party threads either. I think they definately could be useful for certain issues. Like if one group wants to have a REAL call to action over a certain situation or issue (not some false little one just so they can keep opposing views out of a thread). Some things, like letting people know that X, Y Z is effecting our group of like minded thinkers should be allowed.

 

[Els' 3 Ones]

Chicagomom,<br><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/clap.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="clap"><br><br><br>
That rocked!<br><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/jammin.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="jammin">

 

[HoneymoonBaby]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">I’d much rather see people from all political spectrums mount respectful arguments, and be able to disagree than say that we need little ‘safe’ areas where we can slap each other on the back politically without having to examine our own positions (or our candidates).</td>
</tr></table></div>
The problem with this is that one side is soooooooo outnumbered by the other on this site. It gets to be a feeding frenzy whenever conservative ideas are expressed, particularly in Activism. The same group of particularly ardent lefties get very aggressive in scoffing at whoever posted the conservative point of view, rudely questioning their sources, etc. (Not that it's rude simply to question sources -- the way I've seen it done on this board is rude.) The rudeness and aggressiveness not only angers the few conservatives brave enough to post in Activism, but I'm sure it scares away potential posters who would have offered a more balanced point of view, as well, for fear of the same kind of flaming.<br><br>
I would love it if people could simply present their points and agree to disagree if necessary. But that's not how I've seen it work on this board.

 

[cumulus]

Hi:<br><br>
Perhaps instead of new rules or old rules there could be a whole new format; a debate between teams. What if a team of 1-4 persons from each political side of the spectrum got their own screen name and debated as a single entity with the other team of the opposing view. All other screen names might be locked out by the moderators and the whole MDC community could tune in if they wanted. Each team could accept all the imput they wanted from the MDC community in the form of personal messages. This might be a lot of work and thought for each team which is why there might need to be quite a few on each team to spead the work. In my mind this would not be a contest but a discussion geared toward convincing others. There would be only one way to "lose" the debate; personal attacks, rancor, etc..

 

[librarymom]

I want to be in Chicagomom's cheering section....

 

[chicagomom]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>HoneymoonBaby</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">The problem with this is that one side is soooooooo outnumbered by the other on this site. It gets to be a feeding frenzy whenever conservative ideas are expressed, particularly in Activism. The same group of particularly ardent lefties get very aggressive in scoffing at whoever posted the conservative point of view, rudely questioning their sources, etc. (Not that it's rude simply to question sources -- the way I've seen it done on this board is rude.) The rudeness and aggressiveness not only angers the few conservatives brave enough to post in Activism, but I'm sure it scares away potential posters who would have offered a more balanced point of view, as well, for fear of the same kind of flaming.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
I see two very different issues here. First is that one side is outnumbered by the other. And the other is scoffing, rudeness and aggressiveness (which I have seen done by both sides, btw).<br><br>
For the second, I agree that the rules must prevail, moderators need to step in and help direct people away from that. That's why we have moderators.<br><br>
With regard to being outnumbered, however, I don't think being outnumbered is good grounds to set up separate areas for discussion and 'support'. One will always be outnumbered in one political area or another. When I go to a chat room where the majority opinion differs from mine, I expect to be challenged. I think that's reasonable. Going to a board where I know my opinion may be in the minority and then expecting people who disagree with me to say nothing at all (esp if I say something inflammatory) - what kind of political discourse is that?<br><br>
I think it is possible, even desirable, to refine one's political viewpoints without retreating from dissenting opinion.<br><br>
Again, I think one of the biggest problems we have in this country is just this desire to only hear what those who agree with us politically have to say. It's understandable, especially when the stakes seem high and when people are less than polite. But it's dangerous, it makes sheep of us all. And I think that tendency must be resisted in the political arena.<br><br>
So, for me at least, my vote goes to re-establishing civility as a public virtue, learning how to disagree, and abolishing the attitude of political victimhood that robs us of the very thing that makes us great.

 

[TiredX2]

I would vote for a simple designation. For example:<br><br>
"FYT: Conservative Mommas"<br>
&<br>
"FYT: Progressive Mommas"<br>
or the like. It would be understood that those threads were open to debate, but only within a certain sphere. I would hope everyone would be adult enough to respect that.<br><br>
Honestly, I really don't like the abb & conservative threads being on this board. I think they don't belong, but if they have to be here for some reason, so be it.

 

[librarymom]

<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>TiredX2</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;"><br>
Honestly, I really don't like the abb & conservative threads being on this board. I think they don't belong, but if they have to be here for some reason, so be it.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
<br>
May I ask why you don't like them here? Isn't Politics what we are discussing?<br>
Just curious...

 

[Arduinna]

well, I don't see how a "tribal" thread belongs in war and politics.

 

[TexasSuz]

I have no interest in what some at MDC call debate. I enjoyed my tribe thread because I could talk to like minded people without being bashed. I also think that sometimes we referred to the other side (meaning the opposite political party) and the mods took it to be a bash against the other side (meaning political opponents here at MDC). You can't alk about politics without referring to the opposition. I for one, would like my tribal thread to stay in FYT where it belongs! Tribal threads do not belong in Activism or War and Politics!<br><br>
If someone disobeys the rules in a post, remove the post but do not remove the entire thread or tribe. Political groups are tribes just like other groups. This week has been hard for me (with Reagan passing) and my conservatives tribe has provided me such comfort. Now you have taken my group away! That makes me do upset!

 

[TexasSuz]

Why are you trying to move conservatives to War and Politics when it is clear that we don't feel comfortable here.<br><br>
Also, why was the ABB tribe moved to W&P while the conservative thread was closed? I feel that ours should have been moved also, not closed.

 

[TexasSuz]

If the tribes are moved to W&P then will debate be allowed in those threads? If so then we just recreate the problem...we want a tribal area free from debate. I think that type of political discussion should be allowed here. Conservatives here do not want to debate because we are so outnumbered and the debates often turn so personal. I feel that not allowing non-debate political discussions is just a way to shut down the conservative voice here at MDC. Sorry but that is how I feel.