Poll

[admin]

Behold, a poll. This is being considered. Take the time to vote and express your opinion.

The question is "What Do You Think About Paying A Small Fee (That Would Be Donated To Charity) To Retain Access Privileges To The Politics Forum?"

[WT Reader]

Pay to have access to the Political Thread?

With all due respect, I suspect few would pay to read the onslaught of "cut and paste" material by one poster. A poster who so dominates and has commandeered this thread with his/her particular political views that this thread is neither viable to read nor worthy of posting upon any more.

If WT Forum guests and members wish to pay and read such a constant stream of one-way, "my way" political posts (with a slim chance of any really meaningful debate), more power to them.

Definitely not an investment I would ever choose to make.

So the option I choose is: "Will not pay for access and seldom post on the Political Thread as it now exists."

-- WT Reader

[gmg77]

I agree with WT. There is very little on the internet I would pay for. If I cant read political posts here I can go to free republic to catch up on right wing hysteria. I understand the frustration that a community board shouldn't be dominated by politics. I have no idea how it would work but maybe a quota 1-2 political post a day limit or maintain 1:1 ratio of non-political to political.

Good luck admin its a tough job.

[admin]

Believe me, I doubt anyone would pay as well. This is a "throw stuff against the wall and see what sticks" information gathering expedition.

I'm still playing with the idea of requiring real name registration as well... guess what the only reliable method of identity verification I can think of is? I can't rely on email addresses (they can be spoofed) and I can't rely on outright "Yes, I really am So & So" (could still lie about it). I have a couple of other ideas, but foolproof identification would be a $0.99 one-time fee to post (some newspapers are going this route with their online commenting systems to cut down on crap).

I'm still on the hunt for ways to make this forum better than it currently is, so I'm open to ideas. I like gmg's idea on limiting political posts, but it's sadly easier said than done with the limits of the forum software

[kellyann1293]

I guess I don't see the problem with the political posts. If readers don't like them, don't click on the 'Politics' forum. Personally, I like reading different opinions and interesting articles others have run across. Especially if I don't agree with them. But if that's not your cup of tea, there are certainly plenty of websites you can go to where you can preach to the choir, so to speak (no matter which choir you like listening to). There are only a handful of posts here a day, and sometimes days will pass without any posts.

[ClassicalLib17]

Why don't you just come right out and tell the membership that common sense and truth will no longer be tolerated on this forum. If these two members had something to post that they could be proud of, they surely would have done so by now. I hope that there is not a conflict of interest going on here.

[ClassicalLib17]

I think you may be on to something here, admin. Why not have the posters in politics use their own name? I stand proudly behind my posts. The question is: Will WTREADER, gmg77, and a couple of others stand behind their posts. I will not pay to post in the politics section, however, if you are soliciting donations to maintain this site, count me in. We would probably have to meet in person for the donation, because I like to know who I am donating my money to.

[admin]

kellyann1293 Wrote:I guess I don't see the problem with the political posts. If readers don't like them, don't click on the 'Politics' forum.

Kelly - I feel the same way, but apparently others don't and have a strong desire for someone to come in, lock posts, and admonish other members because they don't like what they've read. Common sense would have these people ignore what they've read that didn't sit right with them. Unfortunately, common sense isn't very common

[kellyann1293]

well then let them build, maintain and police their own forum. :roll: Meanwhile, keep up the good work Mr. Admin, and as CL has stated, if donations are needed to keep this site up and running, you know how to contact me.

[WT Reader]

ClassicalLib17 Wrote:Why don't you just come right out and tell the membership that common sense and truth will no longer be tolerated on this forum. If these two members had something to post that they could be proud of, they surely would have done so by now. I hope that there is not a conflict of interest going on here.

Huh, CL ???

You state above "Why don't you just come right out and tell the membership that common sense and truth will no longer be tolerated on this forum"
(italics added).

So are you speaking for yourself?? So what position do you promulgate? Forbidding "common sense and truth" on this publicy accessible exceptional forum? From your stream of never-ending "cut and paste" posts which often make no common sense? By promoting distortions, making many generalizations and goading remarks as you continually do?

Well, you are doing a great job practicing what you preach, i.e. "..common sense and truth will no longer be tolerated on this forum."

So carry on with the blizzard of snow jobs!!

P S: By the way, as you cite me in one of your above posts and since you obviously haven't noticed, in the past I frequently have contributed on this Political Thread. However, every post I make is burried by you with an avalanche of "cut and paste" jobbers which you barely discuss at all. So what is the point of taking the time to reasonably disuss/debate anything here in such a commandeering and wearisome context which you have created??

-- WT Reader