The question of political / conspiracy theory content

Max has a point David... Why didn't you inform the community that Alex intended to nuke the forum?

Without wanting to speak for David, he did say on Skeptiko that whilst Alex had broached the matter with him privately, he (David) had been expecting to be able to have more of a conversation with Alex about it - but Alex then acted suddenly and without warning.

Yeah... More of a backstage conversation, which was my point. Even if David somehow convinced Alex not to destroy Skeptiko, it's sad to see how the work of so many was in the hands of so few.

At the very least we would've expected David to let us know that he was having a fascinating private conversation with Alex.

So...is enough of Skeptiko back that we don't need conspiracy theories or political threads?

Or is that up for discussion still?

[Laird]

So...is enough of Skeptiko back that we don't need conspiracy theories or political threads?

Or is that up for discussion still?

My understanding is that the remaining Skeptiko forums do not support CT or political content (except perhaps for the Shows forum if/when Alex discusses such topics on his podcast). Perhaps, though, David could clarify for us.

If I'm right, then I'd suggest that it's probably the right time for us to wrap up this thread and come to a decision - I don't think there's much for anybody to add. My suggestion would be that somebody rereads the thread and summarises the various possibilities proposed, and that we then set up a poll for folks to choose their preference based on those possibilities, but even better would be if folks think we can negotiate a consensus decision without having to resort to voting. What do you guys think?

[Ninshub]

Negotiating a consensus sounds good to me. If we're able to.

Yeah, at one stage when I was on my own in a debate, I came back to Skeptiko to find a small pile of posts challenging me and one of the posters quoted the same post of mine three times with different challenges and PMd me as well.  It was too much!  If somebody is on their own in a debate we should allow two or three challenging posts then show some respect and allow the debater breathing space to come back.  I want to focus on friendly relationships here because I don't ever want to feel like I have a point to prove again.

It's probably important not to take things that happen on an online forum to heart or so personally.

My understanding is that the remaining Skeptiko forums do not support CT or political content (except perhaps for the Shows forum if/when Alex discusses such topics on his podcast). Perhaps, though, David could clarify for us.

If I'm right, then I'd suggest that it's probably the right time for us to wrap up this thread and come to a decision - I don't think there's much for anybody to add. My suggestion would be that somebody rereads the thread and summarises the various possibilities proposed, and that we then set up a poll for folks to choose their preference based on those possibilities, but even better would be if folks think we can negotiate a consensus decision without having to resort to voting. What do you guys think?

Well I think one of the options Jim offered was pretty fair if possible to implement - a private invitation forum for politics. So it doesn't get seen unless people ask to be invited to see the topics?

Is this feasible? I ask b/c it would affect how I vote.

thanks!

Sci

[Ninshub]

I think we have to distinguish between CTs and politics. We should vote/negotiate on both separate topics. Personally I think I would be OK with a subforum inside Other Stuff that relates to CTs, maybe a category a bit larger, but where the understanding is we shouldn't use it to promote political agendas - but perhaps that's impossible. Could be public or private. Maybe something separate purely related to politics but invitation-only. Perhaps both could not appear in "unread posts" so as not to overtaken the "unread posts" menu page.

It perhaps might be helpful yes to summarize the different possibilities.

[Laird]

It looks like it might not be necessary to summarise the different possibilities if folks are willing to coalesce around the possibilities that Sci and Ian have laid out in the last two posts. These definitely seem like a good starting point for any consensus. I will investigate the possibility of invitation-only subforums.