VOTE: PSW Sub-Section?

[Lord Poe]

Let me state first that I absolutely LOVE to discuss the current Star Wars controversies in the Pure Star Wars Forum here. It's a unique place that doesn't kneel to "VIP" wishes, and is freeform.

For those that don't care about this stuff, I can understand some frustration having to wade through 5 different Traviss threads to discuss Star Wars in general.

Having a sub-forum for these arguments, I think, would make sense. What say ye?

[Dalton]

Would be cool if the current board software supported sub-forums

[Surlethe]

Member Dominus Atheos, in the chat, just approached me and suggested a sticky specifically for the Karen Travissty controversy; he also recommended a moratorium on the issue.

Building on his first suggestion, perhaps the moderators of PSW could create a sticky for the long-lasting controversies, like the 5-mile fallacy and the 3 million GAR issues, since they're pretty few and far between.

(Edited for clarification; I don't personally support a moratorium.)

[RedImperator]

On what basis is he recommending a moratorium on an ongoing controversy which at present happens to be the largest in the technical fandom?

[Surlethe]

On what basis is he recommending a moratorium on an ongoing controversy which at present happens to be the largest in the technical fandom?

Upon further reflection, he would like to withdraw his second suggestion; he had thought that it was reaching Darkstar-level annoyance, and people were me-tooing in the threads. I suggested to him that he contact the moderators instead of trying to address that perceived issue through the Senate.

[RedImperator]

On what basis is he recommending a moratorium on an ongoing controversy which at present happens to be the largest in the technical fandom?

Upon further reflection, he would like to withdraw his second suggestion; he had thought that it was reaching Darkstar-level annoyance, and people were me-tooing in the threads. I suggested to him that he contact the moderators instead of trying to address that perceived issue through the Senate.

The moderating staff would be happy to kick a few me-tooers if that's what's necessary. I believe I can safely speak for us all on that one.

[Edi]

EDIT: Disregard pervious if you saw it. I second Red.

Edi

[Sonnenburg]

I think shifting it off or putting it in a single thread diminishes the fact that this is a significant event in Star Wars history. I can recall no other time in which a Star Wars writer (or anyone within the organization) has effectively declared war on critics, used all their influence to squash them everywhere they appeared, and attempted to alter the Star Wars universe to win a personal argument. That SDN will never knuckle under to that makes us an important voice, and while I understand that having multiple threads devoted to the topic of Karen Traviss/Dark Moose may be frustrating to those with no interest, I believe that so long as each individual thread serves a unique purpose we must remain that voice.

[Coyote]

A subforum would be great if indeed the software supported it; as is I think a sticky would be great, maybe one that is expired and replaced once it gets overly full-- since I see this as a long-running situation.

I'd also say that, in addition to a Sticky, that a permanant Announcement area be made where the controversies are boiled down and explained for those entering the situation, and strategies for countering the arguments put forth bu Traviss and he rminions would be useful.

This crap with Traviss is essentially becoming a catharsis event where the splits between EU wankage fandom and those of us with functioning neurons is coming to a head and sides are being drawn; we need to frame our side of the debate in our terms rather than put up with her nonsense.

[Knife]

While not as involved in the issue as others, I still don't find it annoying with multiple threads that I don't either care about or are not a priority for me. There aren't that many, scroll down for christs sake.

[Mad]

The current threads haven't become obscured by running off the first page by the Clones in the Clone Wars Wars controversy threads, so I don't see that discussing other aspects of Star Wars has been adversely affected by it.

So the only reason to support this change would be if the quality of the controversy threads would increase. I'm not inclined to think they would change too much. The visibility of such threads could even decrease if they were moved to a separate, less active subforum.

[Frank Hipper]

I voted to leave things as they are; multiple threads on multiple events of a Big Star Wars Deal work fine for me.

[Ender]

In case it has escaped anyones notice, the fact that this place will not under any circumstances bow its head to anyone, ever, makes it a particular thorn in the side of those who want to get away with shit. I personally mark that as a point of pride. Every other forum is kowtowing to the demands that it be covered up. That we aren't is important both because it gives people a place to come to, and because it means that no matter how hard they try they can't make all the evidence disappear.

I would fully support a stickey at the top that featured a breakdown of what happened, a list of the quotes and the cited sources (since they have been deleted off wookieepedia despte the vote to keep them) and links to the major threads this has gone down in.

If a sniveling little bootlicking peon like Dominus Atheos wants it to all go away, he can run to somewhere else. starwars.com is perfectly happy to run a place where its aceptable to threaten to kill those who disagree with you and then cover it up. Try that place you little whipped bitch.

[Lord Poe]

I think the trend is pretty clear. Leave things as they are, and a suggestion of a sticky to explain this event and its significance.