NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm not sure if this is the right place but I'm wondering if we can somewhat resolve the amount of threads on the elections.

I'm thinking it might be better to simply have, for the moment:

Obama vs. Clinton
McCain vs. Huckabee
Election 08 - Democrats vs. Republicans

These aren't the most thought out of headings and I know this probably means more work for the Mods in terms of merging a bunch of threads and/or merging future threads as well but, well are we not all getting a little tired of a new thread every time some random blog makes a comment on the elections?

To be frank, I have to agree. It's getting to be a huge mess. We Americans are taking over an international forum for our own political squabbling, and it needs to be limited to a reasonable amount. After all, no other nation takes over the forum when it has elections. The French election as I recall earned maybe three threads AT MOST whereas we're already up to, what, thirty?

I'm in most of those threads and I whole heartedly agree. Most of them are really the same damn discussion and it's a pain in the butt to run from thread to thread to make essentially the same argument over and over again. We're polluting the front page and it isn't necessary. Of course, I don't know how hard that would be for you all. But really, 2/3rds of those threads needn't be. I know I'm culpable because I'm in all of them, but I'm tracking the same argument from thread to thread, so combining them would make things easier for me...and really, isn't that what's most important? sorry, I know it's not...

Clearly I'm winning the popular vote - however the SuperDelegates have shown themselves immune to popular opinion before.

Even though it might seem difficult, let's not have the same multi-threads on one topic that we've seen for so many years.

It's time for change.

Yes we can.

Barringtonia Obama

Clearly I'm winning the popular vote - however the SuperDelegates have shown themselves immune to popular opinion before.

Even though it might seem difficult, let's not have the same multi-threads on one topic that we've seen for so many years.

It's time for change.

Yes we can.

Barringtonia Obama
You should be slapped silly with the fish dance for that! :p

I'm in whole hearted agreement though about merging the current threads into three and keeping them that way until after the election. I know the American political process is one of the the world's greatest circuses that erupts every 4 years (The other being the Olympics) but we don't need quite this many threads about it.

To be frank, I have to agree. It's getting to be a huge mess. We Americans are taking over an international forum for our own political squabbling, and it needs to be limited to a reasonable amount. After all, no other nation takes over the forum when it has elections. The French election as I recall earned maybe three threads AT MOST whereas we're already up to, what, thirty?

That's because, when the French and other Nations have elections, it's not as widely watched as the US elections.

I agree that there is a plethora of threads about the subject, but the same can be said for Religon as well.

A lack of response, I guess, means:

Never.Going.To.Happen.

Is this the case? Or is the request simply too complex to know where to begin in terms of answering.

I've had a few non-responses in Moderation before and I've generally thought that it meant the question was not worth the time to answer but, I don't know, just a nod of acknowledgment would comfort me on these long winter nights.

Not that I'm bitter...

That's because, when the French and other Nations have elections, it's not as widely watched as the US elections.

I agree that there is a plethora of threads about the subject, but the same can be said for Religon as well.

But there is a difference. Religion matters to everyone in one way or another. The U.S. elections do not. Furthermore, religion is a subject without a set time frame, which means it can have more threads. Religion is also a subject of much greater complexity, thus deserving more threads.

Really, the comparison is not apt.

A lack of response, I guess, means:

Never.Going.To.Happen.

Is this the case? Or is the request simply too complex to know where to begin in terms of answering.

I've had a few non-responses in Moderation before and I've generally thought that it meant the question was not worth the time to answer but, I don't know, just a nod of acknowledgment would comfort me on these long winter nights.

Not that I'm bitter...
Er... more likely that the Mods have lives and are possibly talking about things in the Mod Cave. The rule of thumb is wait 24 hrs before complaining of a non-response.

Er... more likely that the Mods have lives and are possibly talking about things in the Mod Cave. The rule of thumb is wait 24 hrs before complaining of a non-response.

Well I absolutely would if it wasn't for the fact that their dirty fingerprints are all over Moderation with judgments here, witty asides there and flourishes all over.

I'm not really too bothered to be honest, just making a note in my little black book...

I was actually thinking that, better to complain, it might be seen as helpful to gather the offending threads and place them correctly under my temporary headings so as to help them Mods - on reflection, it seems too much effort for me and I'm happy to simply complain without offering any solution or help whatsoever.

It's tradition.

... are busy right now. NationStates values our customers and we will attend to your call just as soon as an operator is available. Please hold the line. [burst of tinkling Eine Kleine NachtMusak] Hello. You have reached NationStates Moderation. I'm sorry, all our operators ...

... are busy right now. NationStates values our customers and we will attend to your call just as soon as an operator is available. Please hold the line. [burst of tinkling Eine Kleine NachtMusak] Hello. You have reached NationStates Moderation. I'm sorry, all our operators ...

*adds to little black book*

When the revolution comes, don't think you're first due to alphabetic order...

Disclaimer: This is off the top of my head, and doesn't necessarily represent Official Opinion.


Right now, there's not much point in condensing as things are up in the air still.

Obama v McCain
Clinton v McCain
Obama v Clinton
McCain v Huckabee
McCain Veep?
Clinton Veep?
Obama Veep?
Obama as Clinton's Veep?
Clinton as Obama's Veep?
Dem v Rep

And I'm sure there could be more. I don't really think 10 threads is particularly "condensed". Personally, I wouldn't bother until at least after the conventions.

How about just 3 threads, one about the presidents (wannabe, eh>), the Election, The arguments...
And all need to state in the title post to what post number they replied (this make sense))

I'd just assume not need to micromanage right now.

I'm happy for this to be closed as a discussion, not that it requires my permission anyway.

*uses Jedi mind trick to influence Mods*

"You want to close this thread"

Not till I get a chance to clear our collective reputation ...

... their dirty fingerprints are all over Moderation ...

I'l have you know that every morning we shamble, blinking ... I mean, we run proudly out into the sunlight and line up to have our white gloves inspected by Max Himself! What's more,
When the revolution comes, ...
the revolution ain't gonna come unless you're more careful than you all were last time (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13172797&postcount=5).

Right, mods get the last word. Now it's closed.