Is it time to consolidate the two GD forums?

Many of you probably know that the General Discussion: Politics forum was started way back in late 2003 (under a different name) as a place to discuss the Democratic presidential primary. After the primaries were over, its purpose changed, and it played host to discussions about the presidential general election.

Since Election Day, this forum has remained open under its current name, but it has had no specific purpose. In effect, it's just a second General Discussion forum.

Since Election Day, we have frequently considered shutting down the GD: Politics forum, but each time we decided that as long as people want to use it, we should just leave it open. And to this day, many people use it.

So, we're curious what you all think. Should we keep two GD forums, or should we go back to having only one?

(If we do decide to go back to having only one GD forum, I think we'd probably just drop GD: Politics down into the Politics and Issues folder, and perhaps rename it GD2 or something like that. It would stay open to the people who wanted to use it. And if we ever needed it again -- like, for example, if we need a place to discuss the presidential primaries in 2007/2008 -- we could always bring the second GD forum back up.)

So, what do you think?

Note: I have posted this identical thread in the GD forum, here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2999945

I suppose we should keep only one.

My 2 cents.

GD: P is a good place for intra-party sniping, and I think it might ruin GD if they were consolidated.

GD P is more closely alligned w/ the 2004 primary forum. Fortunately GD P is saner, but still divisive.

GD-P is a narrower focus than plain GD, but "politics" is still broader than the specialized forums. Any changes made would need to take into consideration that many people don't pause to consider carefully which of the specialized forums their post would suit best. Many just choose among Breaking, GD-P, GD, or Lounge when choosing a location for their post.

If you get rid of GD-P and just have GD, it could be rather confusing, like a somewhat more serious Lounge with huge numbers of posts.

To me, the major benefit of having a separate GD-P is that I can go to the topic list and look at the threads and they will all be on different areas of politics. If this were missing, it would be hard to find these threads once they left the main page. I am not going to go searching through every specialty forum for them, but by looking at the GD-P list, I can keep up with a broader area. I have found that helpful.

Edited to add: On the downside, a GD or GD-P article on, say, an
issue related to environmentalism would be very hard to see once it was archived. Is there any possibility of posting in GD or GD-P and archiving in a specialty forum? Alternatively, people would need to be educated about posting in a forum that suits their topic better than a "general" one.

Re-edited to add: Another downside of having general forums is that people whose posts would "fit" in a specialized forum that doesn't have a big readership may feel that their most important posts will be missed if they don't post in multiple places. This happened with a recent excellent post on "The Future of Gay Marriage in MA," here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=221&topic_id=4601
Originally posted in the GLBT Issues forum, I spotted it as it sped down the main DU page and, as a sympathetic MA resident, replied to the post. The poster had also posted in the MA state forum and, on my suggestion, they also posted on the GD forum.. So far, though, there has been very little response to this post, though it deserves more than it has received. I think this is because people just didn't see it.

I give this example because I think it is typical and needs to be considered when rearranging the forums. Not being gay myself, I don't generally visit the GLBT forum topic lists in the limited time I have to search for topics of interest to me, but I am sympathetic to the cause of legalizing gay marriage and would want to know about this post. How to make it visible to both the narrower group that is most directly involved as well as the wider progressive community?

absorption into GD might be a good thing :)

I get so confused.

I feel that there is more ability to express different opinions in GD than in GD-politics. I think a lot of good threads may get little exposure because the political threads would take over like it did before.

the whining and threats against the democratic party in GD:politics isnt helpful at all.

thanks for asking

threads that we might want to reply to would spiral down and away too quickly and might never be seen. As it is, as peak usage these threads can move!

GD is a good place to blow off steam and the threads move quickly off the front page. GD politics posts last longer and invite more in depth discussion. Also, if I'm just hacked, I post in GD. If I want to seriously discuss things like who's gonna be chair, who ought to be on the ticket, should the party move left/right, I'd rather do it on GD politics because I get smarter responses and less flame.

imho

It's confusing when I am looking for something and can't remember where I read it.

Once campaigning begins in earnest, two GD forums will again be needed. For continuity, just keep the two forums as is.

Honestly, these are a distraction to people trying to discuss politics (and I'm not saying there aren't places where these issues do become political). It's just I've noticed with the separation of GD and GDP, people have seen that as a license to foment these divisive discussions because the "political" wing has been separated. I wouldn't mind re-merging them if there was better enforcement of the political nature of GD.

One is for playing nice and practicing being positive. This one is for airing gripes, rants, peeves, etc.

Many of the same reasons already stated. Too many threads being the most important. I really have a hard enough time keeping up with one. I rarely venture to GD. Maybe I just like the rough housing on GDP. Thanks for askin'

There is way too much overlap between the two forums. If there are going to be two, they need to be more carefully differentiated.

I know, it creates more work for you guys and the mods, but it is helpful keeping the politics in one place and everything else in the other - otherwise, things get shoved down way too quick, regardless of topic.

I see similar messages posted in both forums. GD seems to attract mostly non=specific political posts (specific ones go in the appropriate Politics and Issues forum), but so does GD: Politics. Maybe GD: Politics could become a forum dedicated to general neocon/Bush-supporter topics (funny stuff, questions about the GOP, related news articles, etc.) Of course, no inflammatory topics allowed.

It's not like either forum is having a problem finding posters and threads. I like the two different psychological spaces to work things out.

RL

It's nice having a 'political specific' and a 'non-political specific' discussion forum.

thread after thread of "Did you see that tacky dress Jenna was wearing". I like the separation because people can pick and choose.

Plus a lot of LBN that missed the 12/24 hour cut-off ends up in GD.

I vote against.

to consider might be how fast threads scroll in the two forums. Since the archives are unsearchable, it might be better to keep them separate so topics are available longer.

I just posted a call for people to co-sponser democratic agenda. I certainly want to reach as many people as possible with posts of this sort. One board would be much more efficient and the important messages would reach the most people without having two threads in two different places. I think it would make DU stronger because more people would be viewing each thread that was posted, and the whole community participating in important discussions in one place.

http://democrats.senate.gov/cosponsor-form.html

There have been several times I went to post something in here only to discover it was already a hot thread in the GD forum and I just hadn't thought to look in there.

But the other posters have good points. It'll work for me either way.

forums..thanks for asking us.

It takes two, babeeee,

GD and GDP.

I only have so much time, so I usually only hit one folder, but always wonder if I'm missing an excellent conversation elsewhere. The fewer forums the better I think.

I usually come to this room, but it would be a hell of a lot simpler to have one. :thumbsup:

the other one is used for non-political stuff. This forum should be for misc. political stuff.

They always seemed pretty similar to me anyway.

... but only now that you have clarified the focus of the "Democratic Party" and "Election Reform Advocacy and Action" fora.

I predict that some of the GDP content will move to one of those two and the rest will move to GD.

Thanks for asking.

{Edit: changed to GDP instead of GD:P )

going back to one General Discussion forum will make the post drop even faster

if you consolidate them into one again, they will move so fast that a lot of posts will be lost that are now being read in both forums. I think it will speed by like a runaway locomotive....:)

during 'crises' (and they happen all the time here) the posting is so fast and furious it's near impossible to keep up. with two there's more of a chance to read stuff that'd normally sink like a stone.

I think it would probably be better if it was just one forum. That way each thread in both reaches more eyes without having jump from one forum to another.

One of the problems of dear DU is that the huge number of threads created pushes important things off the page within just a few hours in GD and in GD-P. I can't even mention how many important stories are lost to most members. I'd vote for MORE separation and delineation, not less.

but I can see the arguments for keeping just one (atleast for the time being).

I think it'd be better to just throw all threads about future candidates, the party, etc into the GD:P, plus 2006 isn't all tha far away. Eventually there will be discussions about the various senate and gubornatorial races.

I've always looked at GD1 as dealing with the broader social implications of policy/ general discussion of social trends. GD: Politics, on the other hand, deals specifically with strategy, politics, and politicians. It's a very fine distinction, but an important one.

I'd say change it, but they both get a lot of threads. I can't keep up. I think the only way you get to see everything is being a Mod.

I don't think many of them will appreciate 25 threads a day on who should be DNC chair.

There is enough vitriol to go around.

ignore. And smile.

I've always been pro-one-GD, and I see no benefit in splitting up the same discussion topic. Plus, DU now has far too many forums anyway.

Make it one

I see GD-P as more for things relating to specific candidates, policies. Making 1 forum again would be a disaster, imo.

Hell, rename this one to GD - Candidates and Policies.

While GD Politics can seem full of truly vile threads at times, GD itself can seem sort of light-weight. But then there's some cross-over in GD sometimes, too, and GD isn't purely angelic.

The disadvantage to keeping them separate is that they overlap and sometimes cover the same topics. Both seem fairly chaotic at times, and there's a lot of subject repetition.

The advantage to keeping them separate is that GD might involve discussions about news that isn't necessarily less than (what is it, 12?) hours old, but that isn't related to democratic politics per se. GD might involve anything of relatively current interest. It moves very fast. If you threw in the craziness from GD Politics into GD itself...Yikes.

Especially in view of what happened in the last general election, I think you might want to keep them separate--but equal ;-)

GD is good for things not quite LBN and not Lounge material

GD politics serves a good purpose (yes they do overlap at times) too.

Also, if you combine the two things will get flushed away and not get the attention they might need resulting, perhaps, in lots of "kicked" threads for no reason.

Just my 9 CENTS worth.

The merits of a fast-moving forum are that people who are on more frequently get new, fresh content often.

The merits of a slow-moving forum is that people who are on less frequently can find threads and conversations more easily, and participate more easily, and take more time to craft thoughtful posts and threads.

The Lounge, for example, is extremely fast, but with almost NO content. Paradoxically, I feel like although I visit in the lounge often, I don't really know anyone there.

My state forum is very very slow, but with a very high signal-to-noise ratio, and I feel like I have gotten to know a lot of the people there better, although of course we cannot indulge in "chatter" as in the lounge.

IMO, GD is faster than GDP. I see a need for both, because I personally enjoy a slower-moving forum more.

There ya go, my two cents! :P

there are times that things moves so fast on and off the forum front pages that it is hard for real discussions to occur. To think of things moving even more quickly, due to the increased volume of posted threads, might make conversation on threads very, very difficult. My vote: keep the two.

After the election, I thought the idea to have two - one for help and support and one for rancor - was a good idea. I think some of that spirit has remained on the two forums.

And now, as others have said above, there are additional reasons to keep it two. To minimize confusion (which I think is the main argument for consolidation), you could set up posting guidelines for each forum that people could use to determine where to post something.

JMO!

-wildflower

I want a forum where I can avoid the idle chit-chat and the puns and the inside jokes about Pookus's cats.

And for those who like that stuff, a separate forum for it makes it easier for them to wallow in it. ;)

GD seems to attract a very wide range of posts (e.g., today there's posts about the Oscar nominations, general comments about specific news items, etc.

GDP seems to be where people get into more in-depth political & philosophical discussions (stuff like the direction of the party, political strategies, etc).

I think I like it this way. It's hard enough already keeping up with new posts in GDP.

My two cents and thank you for asking.

DU has gotten to be such a big place that sometimes it is hard to keep up with what is going on in the larger forums. Keeping 2 open that cover basically the same issues is not such a bad thing if it gives DU a slightly more "small town" flavor where your posts don't get lost in an enormous flood of material.