Abge - and don't take this as an indication of how i would personally treat a multiple-forum system -- but the notion that trolls won't find there way everywhere is silly. If a troll wants to go into the Diplomacy section and troll, how will they be stopped buy multiple forums?

As it currently stands, I imagine that true Diplomacy thread go unmolested by the trolls - I know that I would never inject myself into a SOW thread, for example, with off-topic posts - whatever you think of me, I know where I am allowed with that crap, and when I do what I do, those that are seeking it, find it, and respond in kind. (i.e. all this "you are destroying my forum" cries from the people that are just as involved with all the poo flinging are grossly hypocritical...)

So - with that in mind, it seems that people are proposing a complex solution to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

If the concerns is "I can't find any diplomacy related threads" then this is a bogus claim - as there are usually diplomacy related threads on the front page, and a simple click of the "Forum" button opens up a list of threads, and a search tool further provides help.

It is in fact rare for a troll thread to dominate the front page...and I would suggest that when that does happen, it is because - for a short period of time - that is what the majority of the people are most interested.

I'm certain nobody would truly object to multiple threads - but I don't' think it 'solves any problems"....in fact, unintended consequences may occur...trolls might go exploring those areas, and create problems just because.

No, I'm not content with it. This whole process does assume that it's only the people who dislike political discussions who are dissatisfied with the ad hom fests. I'd like to have civilized discussions as I think people have interesting views, but apparently the people who believe in civility don't like discussion anything except the dead-horse of diplomacy strategy. Oh well.

" the out-of-control politics forum would be hidden from new users"

What makes you think "out of control political forum" is a detraction? It is just as likely that certain people stay here *because* they can both play a game, and engage in political debate. All this nonsense that everybody is here to play and game and ONLY play a game, and they ONLY want to discuss Diplomacy is so obviously refuted by the existence of all the political threads that I can't believe anyone with eyes to see is discussing this point seriously. It is mind-numbingly simple to mute a thread - Bo does it all the time.

"If a troll wants to go into the Diplomacy section and troll, how will they be stopped buy multiple forums?"

Simple. If you trolled in the Diplomacy section, I would ban you.

I do agree with krellin in regards to Diplomacy posts, though. If you're a person who only likes to talk about Diplomacy, why don't you just post more about Diplomacy? This complain is very foreign to me.

My favorite solution is the liberal use of the mute function, both for threads and people.

But yes, I'd agree that the political stuff should be shipped over to forum.webdiplomacy.net, while the front page of webdiplomacy.net be limited to diplomacy related threads only.

At the very least, if people are going to create two sections (which I think is a bad idea), can it be as one interleaved forum, with a categorization choice when you create a thread? Then there could be a checkbox somewhere reasonably prominent, "Show only (moderated) Diplomacy threads."

I expected that abge -- so you are looking to add more work to your plate?

Are the "diplomacy" threads currently being trolled? Or as i sugggested, are they currently pretty well respected by everyone?

I'm farily certain you could ban someone RIGHT NOW that is trolling a diplomacy thread without having to create a seperate forum...and i'm certain Kestas would back your decision.

So why go through the hassle of coding a new section that adds no value? (And no, "hiding the political discussions" is not a value add -- it is a desire of a select few.

I honestly could care less either way -- but i don't see the ROI on the proposal.

Correct?

I believe the forum has improved tremendously in the past two months in terms of the amount of Diplomacy related discussion. We currently have two official SOW threads, one unofficial SOW thread, a signup thread for the gunboat tournament, live games thread, King is Dead signup thread, GR, 17/17 tournament, and a handful of replacement/question threads.

I know for a fact that everyone joined this site to play Diplomacy and I also know for a fact that everyone on this site likes to talk about Diplomacy. When the forum gets bogged down in junk and troll threads, it tends to highlight only a handful of posters and most members get turned off. Diplomacy threads bring out many more members eager to share their thoughts, which is awesome.

"But yes, I'd agree that the political stuff should be shipped over to forum.webdiplomacy.net, while the front page of webdiplomacy.net be limited to diplomacy related threads only. "

If the non-webdip stuff is taken off the front page, the forum will die. The front page is the delightful trap that gets you ensnared in whatever interesting or crazy conversation is going on. People are not going to go to the trouble to seek it out.

I would again urge that this set of concerns is not one that can be addressed while preserving the current community. The two are incompatible.

@krellin,

Yes, as I've said, I'm not the least bit convinced splitting the Forum would solve anything.

I think the unintended consequences would do more harm than good.

Just for the sake of argument . . . are we worried about ppl leaving webdip? Is the overall use declining? What is the optimal user population?

I think the solution I'm proposing would actually work for Krellin and Semck:

I'm imagining two forums, "Diplomacy" and "Other" (other could be named something else). When you make a thread, you chose which forum it goes in. At the top of the forum display, there would be a checkbox (or tabs) to determine which forum you see. You could set this to "Dip only", "Other only", or "both". The "both" setting would behave as the forum does today. Webdip would remember your setting, so that users can configure it to always see their favourite forum mode (or maybe this is a setting in your profile). By default it is set to "Dip only", so that new users see this as a diplomacy site first and foremost. However, new users who are interested in the politics (etc) discussions will find it by changing that setting, located visibly at the top of the page. And, as abgemacht says, the solution for trolls in the Dip-only forum would be to ban them.

The problem with the mute solution is that threads that are muted still count towards the total number of threads displayed - so if you mute a lot of active threads, you only see two or three threads on the front page. Perhaps it would be worth fixing that, if we decide not to split the forum?

Sign-up/replacement threads evoke discussion? Discussion of what?

I mean we have a living example of what happens when there is only diplomacy-content. Just look at the forum prior to the 2008 election. It was nothing but questions about the rules, reports of technical problems, and cheating accusations.

I'm not kidding myself by thinking that if we prohibited non-diplomacy content, it wouldn't kill the forum. It certainly would. But maybe that's worth it to keep the diplomacy-only people from leaving, at least to the moderators. I don't know.

A_Tin_Can, I can agree that's the most reasonable approach if one is going to do this, although I hope that "Both" would be the default. (I still would rather not do it at all).

Look, if somebody comes here to play Diplomacy and is such a shrinking violet that they can't even be bothered to change the setting or click the tab so they don't see the forum that is causing them SO MUCH DISTRESS, then honestly, what are the odds that they're great at diplomacy? I have yet to meet a good diplomacy player who falls apart when confronted with controversy or strife.

@Tin

Do you think you would post more if there were a Diplomacy Forum? If so, why? If not, then why bother?

So, the whole 1v2 Forum thing is fine and we can keep talking about it.

What I'm more interested in is what people think about general acceptable behavior. I feel like if the Forum was more docile overall, people wouldn't really care if the content was about stuff they were uninterested in.

@abgemacht Yes, I think I would post more, because I would see more of the dip content. For example, today I didn't realise there was a new GR thread until 2WL mentioned it, because it was buried under other non-dip threads. Sure, I can go mute them all, but then I have to go do that every few days if I want to see all the dip content.

I don't think we're going to be able to totally tone down the forum- I think some people play dip because they like to antagonise people, and those people are going to enjoy doing that on the forum too. I think any solution is going to need to keep that in mind.

What do people think of the tagging system?

Think about each thread having a tag that you could then filter. Other than the technical challenges, do people have concerns?

As a noob you don't know what the hell is going on around here so a little crib sheet entitled 'Getting Started' which covers both game play, setting up games and dealing with the forum, IMs, muting, terminology etc would be really useful.
We can already mute threads or people and if from the very start people knew tthey could do that and how to do it they can avoid the forum almost completely, there are a fair few players who just play and avoid the forum.
If you think about the ranting and ridiculous behaviour/comments/insults maybe we are doing the world a big favour, maybe after a rant on here Krellin can go be nice to his family having taken all of his frustrations out on complete strangers, this forum could be pacifying wife-beaters (don't link the two) so maybe it plays an important role in peoples lives, but that role maybe slightly different for different people.
The only people who can complain about Little Lord Fauntleroy are people that haven't muted him, if you don't like it switch it off.
For me the thing I am most interested in and keeps me coming back is how active the site is and the ability to get regular live games, plus Kestas is a great guy for doing this and the Mods do a great job.
Sometimes there is a desire to fix something that isn't actually broken, that desire should be resisted ,,,,,

I like the mutiple forum idea because it makes it easier to find what I am interested in. Notice how many times a thread gets bumped? The reason is because the forum is disorganized and very active.
Organization isnt evil, its practical.

The unmoderated Forum is just fine.

HOWEVER, idiots sending abusive or spammy PMs ought to be disciplined. In my mind, PM abuse is akin to a home invasion.

maple - can you not mute any person? In that instance you would never ever get your home invaded again ......

@maple

PMs are already regulated. If you have a problem, you should tell us.

A "tagging" system where every thread is tagged "1: Dip Related" or "2: Non Dip Related" and then an option to display either 1, 2 or Both is the best option, because it gives everyone the flexibility they want.

From a coding standpoint, every thread is created by two entities - the actual User that created it, and Thread1 or Thread2. You are then essentially muting player Thread1 or Thread2 as needed - it employs existing technology to solve the problem.

OK, so the main discussion seems to be whether or not to have multiple forums. Does this look like an accurate pros/cons list?

PROS:

-Easier to find what you are looking for/interested in (i.e looking for diplomacy thread, you don't have to scroll through pages of social/political stuff)
-Not having to constantly mute new treads you don't care about
-Therefore there could be increased user activity because people can find threads they want to participate in more easily
-No trolling on dip threads (although dip threads are almost entirely respected)
-New players might be less overwhelmed
-More organized=easier to navigate

CONS
-More work for mods/coders
-unintended consequences i.e decreased sense of community (although IMHO people who want to participate in both could just use both, or perhaps there could be a default/old school option to keep it as it is right now for those who don't want their layout to change)

Please post others I've missed/you think of.

We couldn't implement it client-side. It would be a disaster. It would have to be implemented server-side, which would likely require a modest upgrade to the server.