Is there a danger of splintering in to too many groups?

It seems, every time a new group request comes around, that a similar
reason is presented for "not" forming the group... that we should be
able to discuss these issues in the public eye here on GD or one of
the pre-existing main forums, that we are not divided, and that we
remain coherently able to discuss amongst us all.

The protest is not to any particular group, but that groups are lost
to the greater DU membership, and by forming a group, you are
effectively removing the topic from the public mind.

Its a form of positive censorship, that by taking the opinion off the
opinion page, only people who trawl the groups will see the concern.

For example, the call form an anti-war group, which sounds very right
in its intent, actually takes anti-war posts out of GD where we are
more likely to contemplate them.

When various requests come up to form groups, who can say anything but,
"well, if you chaps want it, then go ahead."... and yet, the silent
majority does not see the impact, as it is a negative impact, that
topics on that subject will no longer be common. To speak up in any
single group formation request is counterproductive, as the formers
of said group will only cry out that you're discriminating against
them, when in fact, it is they who are discriminating inadvertently
with the whole of DU, by taking participation and understanding away
in to a pidgeon hole.

It is easy to sell identity politics, as one merely stands up and
shouts for all the people "like me" to come round and form a group,
but the result, is that all of us other folks not like "me" will
lose track and concern over the topics that are important to a
subgroup. And in a greater sense, the persons forming subgroups
are setting the ground for less political coherency between themselves
and the common body politic of DU.

I read this vogue for a buzillion groups as a bad omen of left
politics splintering.

Is this concern of anyone else?

See

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3215355#3224375

I don't want to rain on anyone's parade but the concern is there. For instance, I do not belong to the African American group, but if the members keep their issues there I don't see what is going on so I lose a bit of awareness.

The point of a Group is for people who want to talk about a specialized subject with others who share there interests. Furthermore, it doesn't mean group topics are forbidden in other forums. I don't think there is any danger.

I mean ... as human beings: we are automatically, by nature, formed into groups of 'one each' ... we can NEVER separate or divorce ourselves from our own 'oneness' .... yet even so: we as individuals form into greater groups to promote and advocate mutual causes as needed ...

WHY worry about individuals forming specific groups that focus on specific ideals or ideas ? ... Can we NOT still keep our minds focused on important matters big and small in other areas of our lives ? ...

I don't understand those who would try to stifle willing associations of people ....

Since you don't understand the concerns... It's not about stifling people, as I pointed out earlier, if African Americans keep their concerns in their forum, I lose awareness. If women keep their issues in their forum, I lose a bit of knowing what is happening. And so it goes.

Why do you assume people want to stifle, I want to be more aware of fellow Democrat's concerns and can't be a member of 38 usenet-like forums!

Think of DU as a network of nested volumes of information ... ANY sort of information may be present in that network ...

It is obvious one cannot possibly manage all of that information in ONE forum .... so it makes sense to break down that information into some type of group structure ... ANYONE is free to dip into the group forums and draw relevent information into the main forums, if they think it wise .... no one is stopping this ... You dont have to be a member of a group to peruse their forum .... You are free to start a thread (in GD or elsewhere) on ANY material you find in the other forums .... as is any other DUer ...

I think the OP raises legitimate concerns which concern me too. It's just a fact of life that I won't be dipping into every forum to see what's going on, there are too many. What you mention is key though, for people not to isolate themselves into groups and cliques and NOT post on GD or get the word out...that would be the tragedy.

But take a look from another perspective, as I've posted below. Groups are not meant to be exclusive or seperatists.



Edited to add the wotd NOT because I never remember to proofread!

.

In the case of the UK forum, it is way more than a lounge for
special interests... it is a forum in its own right, where topics do
not cross over to the main forums.

My experience of economics and the meeting room similarly. Perhaps
in the cases you have in mind, it is indeed the "lounge of special
interests" and that sounds good.

you said it very well.

is to splinter us, but to allow us to get to know each other better on a personal level, by sharing a common interest, or belief.

There are some amazingly interesting people here on DU who I would never have met if it weren't for the Groups...

It might take a few days to get your post answered - but, it will still be there. The price you pay for a smaller group.

like the ones organized around possible candidates for 2008, such as John Kerry or Wes Clark or Edwards.

The reason these are good is that many times if these names are brought up in GD or GD-Politics, then a whole bunch of DUers who seem to hold an angry grudge against one or more of these politicians will all chime in and basically make the thread a flamefest. Within the groups, like-minded people who like and admire these politicians can discuss them in a positive way, without 'hit squads' bringing in waves of negativity.

But this doesn't limit discussion of these topics to groups like the other poster said, so there really isn't a problem.

I rarely post in the political groups...mostly Photography and Art.

Threads about specific topics sometimes sink either in GD or in the Lounge. But get enough people who want to talk about something together in a quite corner, why should anyone object to what we're talking about.

I don't have time to go through the myriad of groups, and I am interested in a lot of issues. I like the convenience of finding something to read and comment on about lots of different issues in one place, like GD. Plus, removing the issue from the GD forum does reduce its impact. Many people are not going to see things that are posted in a group they never visit. I've noticed that the traffic on GD is much less than it was.

I skim through all the DU groups, learning their issues and seeing what the concerns for each group is. There are still plenty of posts in GD.

For example, even though I suggested the anti-war group, when there is a big demonstration going on, naturally I planned to post it on the GD board. But there are tiems when others are wanting to plan a demonstration. Thoses threads are long and drawn out, often interrupted by posts that have nothing to do with the subject. A group is a way to work out and discuss all the details before cementing the idea.

As with any of the DU groups, it is nice to have all the similar threads in one place. I often go searching for information (often about anti-war issues) and can't find them. I always regret not keeping a written recoed of the facts, links, statistics, etc. Now, they can all be in one place where everyone can reference them.

I personally have no problem with all the groups that have formed. Why can't people who have a particualr interest get together and talk? In the African-American group, they are working on an article to post on the GD in regards to many racist threads thay have read and are concerned over. A group forum is perfect to work though their ideas and finalize the final article before posting it.

As someone who has posted things which have unintentinally upset some emembers of the African-American grous, when I read through their group, I learned so much. It really was eye opening. I never would have grown to a deeper understanding of their take on the Hallee Berry thread(for example)if the posts regarding this had been spread out all across the board.

Often, the threads on the main boards fly quickly down to the bottom and to following pages. If you're not right there, you might miss something you would have liked to have known and read.

I have also supported the Jewish thread, which I know was particularly opposed by the orginal poster of this thread. I think having small groups gives people a place to post where they can address their direct concerns. Many people who have supported both the anti-war group and the Jewish group are also people whose name I see on other threads all the time.

Most people will most likely not spend all their time in a Group. I love all the different aspects of DU. That's what makes DU Democratic. We are not all forced onto one board. We can break up into small groups, float from here to there. For me, DU seems to be about trying to please a very large group of people. We all have our sperate interests, but we are all bound together by our hatred for all things *.

If one doesn't care for groups, that is totally fine. But please do not be so upset. Many of us like floating form main board to small groups. DU is here to please all kinds of different people. Aren't there over 63 thousand of us that are logged in? That sure is a lot of different opinions to please.

Anyway, that is my take on the whole DU Group thing.

Peace
:hug:



Edited to clar up verbage that may have been taken wrong.

what the hell is wrong with you ?


(that was a joke)

A joke well taken, my friend! :pals:

As we all have limited time, every group takes the public mind out of
the unity of the main forums, by the very nature that perusing posts
and making points takes time, energy and screen real estate.

Your argument(s) very much model what our congress does, with many
committees holding sub discussions, that by hearing what is discussed
in the main chamber, little substance is presented. In effect, the
committees have superceded the primary chamber as the places where
public mind comes together, yet strangely where fewer of the participants
are elected.

Indeed, i did protest the formation of a jewish subgroup to religion
as by taking those issues away in to a hole, it does jewish people no
service, as i believe it will promote less understanding, not more,
as fewer people see and read such threads. In this regard, my protest
was misinterpreted, and perverted that it reflect the driect opposite
of what i had presented. My concern is increasingly that it is easier
to preach to a choir down in a subgroup, and leave the public mind
generally denied input from jewish thinking in the main religion forum. Lack of understanding of jewish concerns is what fosters
anti-semitism to start with. Very possibly, such a subgroup will
actually create a more fertile ground for antisemitism in primary
debate. (and you're wrong, i did endorse the jewish group after
airing these very concerns with the threads founder, and accepting
that indeed there is little point in opposing, as one will just
be branded antisemitic)

This could be said of GBLT or any other subgroup, that there is an
implicit danger, of not integrating with the discussion body politic
that we are able to coherently as a political movement stand for the
just equality and conerns of all these areas of niche concern.

I try to keep up with groups, and i have them on my favorites page,
things i really like like, religion, econmics, the UK and others...
yet it is simply too much browser real-estate to keep up on them,
so i've most of them go cold, and i know i'm missing some good stuff,
but its just too thinly spread.

As much as i'd like to believe you're the norm, i think you're the
exception, and most of DU will miss out on what goes on in the
groups.

I missed the thread where you endored and let your star be counted towards forming the group. If you're oppsed to DU grous, you don't have to allow your star to be counted.

I think we're just going to have to "agree to disagree" in terms of DU groups. I love them. You don't. That is fine. I will encourage all those in any groupo I'm in to post major thoughts and events on the main forum, along with your reasons in regards to the traffic on GD being lighter and not being open with the group's thoughts.

Have you visited group boards and let them know how you feel? Try this and see what kind of a respose you get. I'm not saying go and protest the groups, but remind them that GD is always open to their thoughts and concerns. Many may not realize there is a growing concern.

However, that being said, I still love DU groups and plan on visiting them and contriuting now that I have a donor star.

Peace friend,
T

I accept that DU is, necessarily, a broad church. However, I get really disillusioned when I see rant threads on religion, abortion, guns and other, emotionally charged topics. Not seeing the wood for the trees and all that. (I'm not talking about the non-political fora btw)

Those who come here presumably share broad, common POLITICAL values. Arguments about single issues do little to advance that common cause but they do much to fragment the broad base of progressive ideals that typify DU, particularly heated debates about those issues that are likely to generate a polarisation of opinion. Moreover, I suspect that some of the debates are initiated by agitprop types for the very reason that this diverts attention from the main aim of concentrating on macro issues.

The one thing that makes the right wing dangerous is its ability to unite against the progressive movement. The r/w, historically, has a core value system that leaves little room for debate amongst its membership. We, on the other hand, are so diverse (one could possibly substitute "tolerant" for "diverse") that there is bound to be immense scope for argument. Does that achieve anything in real terms?

The old maxim of "divide and rule" is a constant throughout history. Every time we argue about micro issues, that have potential for polarising the debate, we fragment our base.

Well said my friend.

with people who have similar interests. For example, the Artists Group. These people are artists or have interst in the area of Arts. This isn't divide and concour. They aren't agaisnt anyone, they simply have a shared interest in art and they also happen to have a shared political background.

I think it's the same with the Jewish group. They all have a progressive/liberal political beliefs and share the same religious faith. It's the same with the various Charistian groups and other similar groups. The anti-war group I had in mind is simply a place to get all the details of anti-war activites and a place to form our own demonstrations, work out the details then announce it on the main forums.It isn't meant to shut anyone out. Everyone is welcomed. But when you come to one of these groups, you know exactly what the topic is. It is also a place to help shape the message since, according to Hersh, the grassroots is where it is at.

From someone who enjoys the Groups and has proposed a group, this is where I am coming from. While I can't speak for everyone, only for myself, I'd bet a large number of DUers who like DU groups are coming from this frame of mind.



:)

that I was wrong. The spirit of give and take has been lost in DU. The "fussing" is one of the things that made it fun. The moderators keep us from getting really mean. If a subject or person is just not to my taste - it is simple to use my ignore button.

Being surrounded by "yes" men is not good for us - or very interesting - and that is what so many groups have mostly evolved into. The idea was for people with like ideas to form groups. That sounds good but is just not really working. IMHO.

DU cannot be all things to all people and should not try to be.

I wish Skinner would give it some serious thought.

.

Any questions about how DU operates should
be addressed in the Ask The Administrators
forum.


Thank.


DU Moderator