Alternate Means of Communication

PS- Don't be worried by the name of the site. It's not an extremist site. If it was, I wouldn't have signed up.

However, the name is a label. I will take a look.

Did you read through this thread? there are out and out racists riding on it.

When having a semi-dedicated political forum, it's not unlikely to get some threads like this. They have rights to their political / social opinions as much as anyone else (whether they're right or wrong)

I think this thread follows the exception rather than the rule. I'm much more of a speak softly and carry a big stick type of fellow, but I'll definitely keep an eye on this site. Good grab, kramarat

Thanks,

I think there may be some off color jokes over there, but I will not be a party to racism. If people exist there that go there.............they are not conservatives, they are racists.

I also just told them about CR4, and told them to come check it out if they feel inclined to get into discussions of a more technical nature.

I applaud your suggestion to move politics away from CR4. This is something we've sorely needed.

I'm sure you feel that "The Conservative Forum" is an excellent site, but clearly it would not be a very welcome home to those of us here who are not Conservatives.

Let me suggest instead another alternative: "The Political Forums". It's somewhat less partisan and like your site has a series of subsections for Science, History, Philosophy, etc. I think this would be a much better choice for a broader range of CR4 users.

I've been looking around over there, and it's most definitely not all conservatives.

My suggestion also was not to provide a place just for CR4 members of a certain political ilk, but was based on the freedom to post on any subject at all over there, and if we kept our same user names as we have on CR4, we can easily redirect political discussion over there.

In no way is it intended to be a trap to lure in certain individuals and gang up on them. All political discussion is welcome, (from what I've seen), and no point of view is any more important than any other.

From what I've seen, the primary requirements are to be honest, keep raging personal arguments off the forum, and other than that, have at it....................political debate is what it's for. It would be boring if everyone agreed.

I hope that CR4 members that like to talk politics can get past the fact that it says "conservative" in the name, and just look at it for what it is....................a place to talk politics, and leave CR4 for engineering.

Heck, there's even a spot for dirty jokes.

While I agree that it's not exclusively visited by conservatives, it does seem to be largely so. It's not the name alone which conveys that the site is primarily intended for conservatives. One only need to look at the "Friends of CPF" links on the main page. (As a side note, here's an example of a "humorous" post (The Riddle) from one of their friends. Nice, eh? )

I'm not arguing that The Conservative Forum shouldn't exist nor against the doubtlessly fine character of the majority of its commenters. But I see little appeal in frequeting a site which at its core certainly represents this particular political viewpoint. There are scores of more neutral discussion sites where CR4 members could meet up and I hope others here will also suggest some. But by all means, those CR4-ers who prefer karamat's site suggestion do please enjoy!

I really don't care. I'll probably hang around the site I came up with from time to time.

If you guys come up with a site where we can carry on our political or other OT discussions, (as a group), I'm fine with it. It's not that it happens every day.

It would just be an avenue for us to take when things go political on here. It can be a liberal site................doesn't matter. Find one that everyone can agree on, and I'll sign up.

"Find one that everyone can agree on, and I'll sign up."

Good one, huh?

Oh well, it was just a thought. My criteria wasn't particularly what flavor of political site it was, just one that would allow us to carry on our political, (or other OT), conversations, without bringing on the wrath of a new set of moderators. Given the fact that this one tends to let everyone say what they want, (even if it's somewhat offensive), seemed to fit the bill.

There are also other thread topics there, that are outside the realm of politics, but not within the realm of what would be acceptable on CR4.

Since we've gotten to know each other around here, it would be nice to have an outlet for these conversations to take place.

Edit.... There's even a conspiracy section. From aliens, to JFK, to the guys here that think the government blew up the trade center....................we could go talk about it.

Regardless of the site, I think there will be people and posts that will be ignored, at least by me. I think I could go to any discussion forum on the internet and find things I don't like.

Good link, I have already book marked it.

Thank you, been looking for something like this.

Some of us have a tendency to stay away from discussions regarding politics, economics, current events, etc. I'm one of the guiltiest.

Not a bad idea, all in all. I wonder if Transcendian spends his time there? Has anyone heard from Russell? I'll check his site.

He'll get the word.

I haven't spent a lot of time on the site, and I wouldn't be surprised if there are some things on there that could be considered offensive...............I didn't see any.

Some of us here, enjoy getting off the path and into different areas of discussion. I wasn't intending for this site to replace CR4, but rather than muddy the waters on here, if those of us that do like to get into these discussions, had a place to go, where our names were all the same, I think it would be cool. It would also serve to open up CR4 to a new group of people that may want to get into more technical speak.........................everybody wins.

I started a thread over there this morning, introducing myself. Drop by and say hello. I'll still be primarily on here.

It's not a trap.

Conservatism is not a bad word.

Say, I just thought of something...

You're not going to encourage a bunch of those guys to come join CR4, are you?

[edit] OH NO! Too late!

I already did. With the stipulation, that if they want to come over here..............it would strictly be a site for people that were interested in technical conversation. Not politics.

Just as there are some here that stay away from politics, I'm sure there are some people over there on the science and tech forums, that are getting sick of having politics be the focus of every conversation.

They have moderators and report buttons also, just a much wider range of topics, including politics and economics.

Heck, my first thread is in the living room. It looks like you and lyn could even go over there, pour a stiff drink, and discuss the future of lyndoor right in front of everyone.

Oh, I'm teasin' ya. There may well be some members there who can contribute some great stuff around here. Trans is a good example; he was a great contributor, but he wanted to talk politics, and I think he grew tired of being shut down.

The mods are, as we all know, capable of clamping a lid on a discussion that is way. way outside the wavy boundaries of CR4. Not worried about it.

It'll be awesome if it works out. I'm already used to talking to you guys, and I'm not the type to jump around forums. I even got to use my spider over there.

If some of us get to straying off track over here, and we are the same people over there, Savvy, or whoever the mod is, can simply tell us to move it over there. We can have our cake and eat it too. The mods can get some sleep without worrying what we're up to.

Got to use your spiderweb... Cool!

I belong to a another discussion group, construction oriented. The site has more limited capabilities than CR4, and the only picture I could find that would fit the size allowed (that I liked at all) was Stinky Pete!

So, those guys think I live in a refrigerator box and my car is a shopping cart!

Said the spider to the fly....it just looks like a web, it's really just a tea party...

kram,

Thanks for the link.

I browsed it briefly and book marked it.

Will return to explore when I have a little more time.

Regards - KJK

Here's my opening thread for anyone that's interested. So far, so good.

http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/the-living-room/new-members-looking-for-a-home-away-from-home/

Be forewarned. Not much moderation. It appears that everyone can speak their mind.

My last post over there was bragging on CR4, and the willingness of everyone here to jump in and help..........................on all matters technical.

Go figure. I bring up the possibility of taking certain conversations off site..............................and we end up having one.

I applaud your suggestion to move political discussion away from CR4. Something that is sorely needed!

I'm sure that you feel that "The Conservative Forum" is an excellent site. However for those of us who aren't Conservatives it's obviously not a very appealing environment.

If I may suggest an alternative altnerate, how about "The Political Foums"? It's a somehwat less partisan site and similarly has Science, History, Philosophy, Economics, etc. subsections. It seems that it would offer more to a wider range of CR4 users.

Hmmp! My apologies on the double post. My browser blew a fuse when I submitted the above post and I thought it didn't go through. Seems I responded to the entire post rather than comment #1, as I originally intended, and only now caught it.

Look, I've only had 3 cups of coffee this morning. I'm still 2 short of conciousness.

I'm not one to visit political forums, but as long as we're offering candidates...

this one seems very varied.

"I'm sure that you feel that "The Conservative Forum" is an excellent site. However for those of us who aren't Conservatives it's obviously not a very appealing environment."

Where do you become best in your thinking, where everyone thinks like you do or where there is a divergence of thoughts and ideas? Those divergent ideas will challenge our thinking about what we accept to be true or not. We only really become better in our thinking when we have to defend our ideas and why we have them.

Took a look at the forum and heard "lefty" and "libs" used in a negative way more times than i could count so not too sure im gonna join :\ .... Personally when talking politics, i find that the terms "lefty" "righty" , "liberal" and "conservative" serve more to divide people than to clarify their stance on a particular topic. Divide and conquer. I mean really, where does a "lib" or "conservative" stand on taxes, war, gay marriage, corporate personhood etc. The politcal spectrum is much more complex than just left and right.

Agreed. I saw the terms lefty and libs used, but in general conversation, not as a slam from one member to another. Those terms, as well as righty, teab***r and worse, have also showed up on CR4. There are people that are going to use those terms, wherever they happen to be posting.

I'm not trying to force an agenda, just thought I found a place to talk politics if we wanted.

There's no reason to register right now, nor to participate in the least in the other forum. The only goal, was to find a common place to talk politics with the people we already know from CR4, should the need arise.

I personally have political views on varying subjects that range from slightly liberal, to libertarian, to conservative, to borderline anarchist. I think it's impossible to peg any individual person with one label. I do enjoy debating my position on a particular topic, and will probably be spending some time over there, rather than venting on here.

I'm currently on a thread about the use of drones in the US. It's a political hot button topic. Having the ability to analyze it from a purely political perspective...............along with having the arguments that go along with it, make me feel better. It's nice to have found a place to do it..................where it's normal and expected.

The reality is, that there are a relative few of us that get off on political tangents.......................probably less than ten. When we do, we have the ability to turn threads into political train wrecks.......................I'm just looking at options.

agreed...political train wreck is my middle name... i guess a "politics" section in CR4 is out of the question?

Maybe I just haven't been paying attention enough, but I haven't noticed many train wrecks, lately.

I don't disagree that CR4 is primarily intended for engineering. But engineers are human and there just happens to be scientific and technological topics that are impacted by government and, therefore, politics. So it is natural for the conversation to wander "off track" in those instances. It's the engineering mindset and is part of "troubleshooting" problems. (Strictly speaking, quantum physics isn't "engineering." That often involves, or leads to the subject of cosmology, where the subject of religion might come up. Likewise, biology often brings up the subject of evolution. And we know how controversial that can be. Do we eliminate those subjects from being discussed because of these tendencies? Just musing.)

As long as conversation remains civil (moderators can intercede) I don't see that political references are much different (meaning too off-engineering-topic) than health/nutrition, exercise, yoga, etc. (And those subjects can invite political comments, too, about national health care, for instance.) It's mostly conversation. True, the tendency for unwanted flareups is higher when politics or religion comes up, but, so far, I think the moderators do keep posts civil and within bounds.

Minimize politics? By occurrences, I think it is already. I don't know about a head count as to how many here indulge in political banter, but it is relatively small, I think, as you point out. It would be interesting to review, say, 100 threads, to see how many posts are totally political, non-scientific, and whether or not name-calling comes up. (And I see that kind of stereotypical use of labels fairly often, in threads -- mostly as an aside or in OT posts. Is that tempered? We might find more tolerance for, short, off-hand, inflammatory comments, than there should be, under this ideal.) Most people posting have been here long enough to know that political dialogue is frowned upon. But should it be eliminated? Is that what is being asked?

The other side of that coin is that a large (?? apparently) majority do not wish to see any political discussions and want the forums to be as technically oriented as possible. I think for the most part they are. To discourage any comments about the environment (governmental involvement and oversight) that affects science and technology seems simplistic to me. Just me, I guess. Does that mean global warming (or climate change, as is more PC now) is a taboo subject? It is science-based, but certainly has the mentioned governmental factors that simply can't be removed from the conversation, if the conversation is to have any real merit to it.

This is a community. Why should members be directed to go elsewhere to express the non-technical side of their personalities? Civility should be the measure. Moderators do their best to maintain that. As long as social/political commentary is kept civil, what's the harm? Conversation, should be allowed to be... well... conversational. If only technical issues should be discussed, I think a lot of threads/questions could be answered elsewhere on the web by a little searching. No, it's as much about community as it is about engineering.

Obviously, admins. can enforce whatever rules they wish. As in the case of smoking, we can be asked to leave the building when we wish to indulge in unhealthy activities.

My $0.02.

This isn't strictly about politics. It's also about having an avenue in which those of us that want to, can have conversations, (in a forum format), on entirely different topics that have no place on CR4. I'm not simply looking for a spot to go fight, nor would I target someone else's forum just to go fight.

Your mention of global warming is a great example. Sure it's science to a degree, but the conversations quickly turn into political and ideological mud fights...............even if we're trying to get along.

Evolution, aliens, conspiracies, financial topics, entertainment, world events.........................the list goes on of things that some of us may want to talk about with the people that we already know, but don't qualify as valid CR4 threads.

As it stands, the only way to do that is through the PM system. That's no fun.

My personal feeling, is that if we had a place to carry on these discussions, the threads here would be more pertinent and focused.

Edit---Another example would be my thread on where you guys go to get unbiased news. It didn't get shut down, but it was deemed to be too controversial or OT for the front page and taken down. It would be nice to have a place to ask questions like that, have it stand, and get answers from the same people I'm used to talking to.

That is a logical position.

If GW is deemed too controversial, I would also include most Biology in that category, as it now rests on Evolutionary theory. It would be hard to read any article about biological topics where that isn't alluded to or implied as accepted; i.e., proven? For people who don't think it is "proven," inflammatory feelings are evoked, whether acted upon or not. If we are trying not to be offensive, then we now have to eliminate any mention of Evolution. It becomes like the censoring of "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn."

So how do you have science-based topic discussions that can lead to political comments if that is undesired? Eliminate those topics? Those types of comments can be very integral to the discussion. Tolerating some social/political commentary is like taking a photo from B/W to color.

Your Edit is precisely what I ended with in my previous post. Community is important to most. People know when they post they are posting to other entities they have already established relationships with. Obviously there are many, many other forums on the Internet where "impure" subjects can be and are discussed. But, as you mention, you'd like to discuss them with the friends you've made here, in other than PM. (PM should be for personal communications, not trying to discuss subjects that aren't.) PM eliminates participation by others, whereby some interesting viewpoints can be espoused.

Many forums allow "rooms" for discussing OT subjects. (Sports forums, for instance. How far afield are these topics from sports?? And it is, presumably, allowed, for the sake of community.) I would suggest having one on CR4 named, "Pseudo-Science." That way "science" gets mentioned, as well as the general opinion of the topics therein, as "pseudo." Some topics labeled pseudo-science can include science, as either a critique, or the efforts to bring the scientific method to an arena where it is needed. I mentioned in your other thread you refer to, that collecting earmarks in legislation together and calling them that would be preferable to having them scattered, and mostly hidden.

Having a "room" somewhere on CR4 for the types of discussions you mention wouldn't diminish CR4, IMHO. It would just be a recognition that engineers (and non who post here) have varied interests like everyone and maintaining a community feeling is important. And, truly speaking, there are more than a few non-engineers here. The other advantage to having a place for threads like you and some others would like to discuss, is, it does become more localized (contained) and can easily be ignored by those who dislike those subjects, rather than have them crop up, OT, in the middle of a thread. Discussions that meander "off track" too much would be moved by the moderators/admiins. there with a comment and link explaining why. What would be the harm in trying it on an experimental/probationary basis? Maybe the fear is that the popularity of it would overshadow the engineering side. If it turned out that way, what would that say?? And if not, then no harm done; only an improvement, as I see it.

Ultimately, civility can be effectively maintained by the ability of admins. to ban anyone who refuses to be civil.

Purity is an ideal, but most life isn't that way.

I would vote this comment a GA.

Well said. This is something that, I think, we forget sometimes.

I understand and admire your effort to "walk a mile in their shoes."

I'd say the key words in your response are "small component." That's all the more reason to argue it doesn't make a hill of beans. I can't imagine the cost to provide one more forum heading would amount to much. And I can't imagine a user of GoblaSpec sending an email of complaint if such a thread-home existed. I use GlobalSpec mostly to find products. I could care less if CR4 has posts that I disagree with or think don't fit the perceived "engineering" persona. I would still use GlobalSpec because IT is the product, not CR4

If other, less commercial forums, can support the idea and implement it, in a functional way, I don't see it as a huge strain on GlobalSpec. Unless some figures of cost/burden can be shown to make the case. If so, fine. Someone make the case with figures, please. If it's just that the powers that be don't like it, that's another thing, and certainly their prerogative. But it seems narrow-minded to me.

I truly believe that most people have had enough exposure to the back and forth on controversial subjects, that worrisome posts are already, because of that, self-limiting and self-correcting. Most people know the boundaries and should know when not to post and cool off; or better become more diplomatic.

Well, good luck with that. It's up to the site owners. When admin approaches the big guys and asks, "Can we do this?" The response is going to be, " How does it benefit GlobalSpec?"

I've worked for enough companies to know that it's rare for what the employees want, to be cared about.......................much less a bunch of yahoos that hang out on their site.

We'll see what happens.

Well, we don't even qualify as employees. We're further down the totem pole. Or are you implying that admins. are in favor of this but have their hands tied?

Waiting to see what happens may not be relevant if the question isn't posed... and/or if it is, how. Presentations will almost always carry a bias of sorts -- that's just human nature. So I won't hold my breath. I do tend to think tolerance is similar to the "Miracle on 34th St." effect. Give people more credit (?) than just being a "customer" for "our" store. That is appreciated.

The reverse question, "How does it hurt GlobalSpec" is valid, too. I think my point as to whether anyone will use GlobalSpec or not due to posts on CR4, helps maintain a realistic perspective. If controversial posts hurt the business, I don't think the Guest posts would have lasted as long as they did. My understanding is that it was complaints by CR4'ers that got that changed, rather than an administrative observation. Which just means the community was the mover, not higher-ups.

But it seems proper to wind this discussion down. We can offer good, reasonable arguments "For." But if not enough members are interested, it won't end in any concrete action. That raises the question of how to gauge that. I thought about a way, but I'm taking tomorrow off to have a long Memorial weekend. I'll wait until next week to revisit the idea and see if it seems worth posting. And that may be a Catch-22 question anyhow.

If I was an owner at Globalspec I would dismiss the idea outright. No further conversation needed. I wouldn't even take the risk of having the OT discussions become more popular than the engineering stuff. Period. End of story. Get out of my office.

Besides, it already happened once..................not intentionally.

An OT farce ballooned into 20,000+ posts on one thread and a community within a community, most of whom never ventured out into the main forum. A couple of them that did, either came out to start fires or throw gas on some smoldering embers. Again, most of them were okay. The ones that contributed on the main forum were well liked.....................but you know what they say about bad apples.

Well, you've done it again. Peverted a perfectly good technical site with talk about politics.

I suppose we'll be scheduling time for medical and religious studies here next.

Might as well throw in astrology for Vader.

Seriously, this site is what it is. It's that way because intelligent people stay here, once they stumble onto it. (No reference to you kram)

Back in the day, I'd have invited you to go start your own damn forum, but you have started some very interesting and provocative threads here. And we have a lot in common, although your new playmates would call me a RINO.

I like it just fine the way it is.

Exactamundo!!!

You hit the nail on the head. I like it the way it is too. Taxes' site offers a broad range of leeway on topics of discussion, and the content of posts. Rather than being shot down, heated political discussion is encouraged..................or any other discussion for that matter.

If admin doesn't catch repeated, outright hate speech, the other members seem fully capable of tamping down the flames. Black, white, left and right. CR4 is a great site, and I don't see a need to try to push for OT sections. Like you said..................it is what it is. I'm fine with that.

SolarEagle- You're entitled to feel however you want. Unfortunately, your attitude is far too common. Whether you've earned your millions, or have secured a lifetime of welfare checks, there are far too many Americans that have disengaged from the political process and the discourse that goes with it. Both the republicans and democrats in Washington have put us on a collision course with disaster. To me, ignoring it is no longer an option.

Washington has no answers. The answers are going to come from people just like us, (regardless of political affiliation), sitting down, hashing things out, coming up with answers, and demanding that the people in Washington do our bidding. To me this is not a joke. We don't have time to worry about black-white-left-right...............................only right VS wrong. We all know the difference. Some just need to dig deeper than others.

I find it amusing that instead of just stating your opinion you have to crap on somebody else to make it sound valid, and at the same time say it's their right to be wrong....What a piece of work...

It makes me happy that I amuse you.

You're right max, but terms like 'libs' and 'cons' are used to refer to a standard set of positions. In your example of taxes, cons typically think taxes should be lower, and libs think taxes should be higher (at least for the high earners). No one "likes" war, but libs tend to want a smaller defense spending, while cons typically want more defense spending. It is indeed more complex than left v right, but you are referring to those who discuss the depths of the topic tend to get past that anyway. Someone who listens to a liberal perspective, like a Bill O'Reilly or Chris Matthews, and comes to the discussion ready to parrot talking points, tend to be more accurately fit into a "lib" box, for example. When two opposing views get out of the parroting and discuss the meat and potatoes (sp?) of a topic, then the "box" goes away.

Welcome to CR4.

"but terms like 'libs' and 'cons' are used to refer to a standard set of positions."

I must disagree, you imply that the set is constant, it is not, the constant is change. I was a Rockefeller Republican, fiscally conservative and socially liberal. This was the Republican Party position in those days. Now, in the last thirty years, starting with President Reagan, they have become fiscally irresponsible and are trying to legislate morality, what are euphemistically called, "family values". The Democratic Party has moved to the center since President Clinton arrived.

Back in the early sixties, before I came to the States, someone explained the positions as, the Republican Party is something like our Conservative Party and the Democratic Party is something like our Conservative Party. Both parties had conservative and liberals in the different dimensions such as fiscal policy and social policy.

Now, I am an independent. I want the money taken out of the game.

It's still kind of the same. My primary worry is with the fiscal aspect of things. I hold both republicans and democrats responsible. We've got to curb the spending and make serious moves to get out of this hole. That's my opinion anyway. I've never seen anyone spend their way out of trouble.