Al G, I don't think you should be able to threaten and insult Jag on the new board like you do here. Calling her the daughter of Farrakhan and implying that a call to the FBI can be made on her behalf - that is something we don't need in the new board.
That's something that should not be allowed by anybody on ANY board.
If someone is breaking the law, infringing on another's rights...that's one thing, ...but for having a differing opinion? 
Put passionate people on there. nothing gets deleted unless it breaks rules. And yes, there might need to be three threads on one topic. There are currently 75 threads on Jay's Mr O win on the main board. Can you imagine the mess G&O would be if they merged?
I'm ready to break down evidence, spread things out and have a nice fine debate 
As for a new child board, at this point in time, I really don't see why one is necessary. . . especially in light of the cyclical nature of politics. This is an election year, so we're going to see political issues permeating discussion far more frequently than at other times. There are a lot of things going on in the world of politics right now and that inevitably will spark more watercooler discussion.
The big challenge I have is when people choose to hijack threads and spin them off into an entirely new area. I think a new topic is warranted for that. eg: Katie's revenge. I bring this up, not because it is a topic I started, but rather because I believe it is the clearest example I can immediately bring to mind. This thread was properly titled and the subject matter made clear immediately, ...however it was hijacked and spun in a different direction. I'm of the opinion a new topic should have been started by those who wanted to discuss the issues they raised off-topic to the thread, because those who perhaps may have found it of interest, most likely would not see it. having initially clicked on it, they would continue to assume new posts to the thread would be about vigilante jailhouse justice. This deprives participants of the opportunity for discourse and input into a topic they otherwise might find of interest and to which they may have something of value to contribute ...at least those posters with self control. I don't know where it is written that says one must read every single post or subject they encounter. Where does such a lack of self-control stem from? ...and when should others be held responsible for
their lack of self-control? It's not a magnet, ...it's a post on a bulletin board.
I also have a problem with moderators arbitrarily merging threads especially into those of DIFFERENT subjects, and especially without any notification to the original poster, or to the rest of the readers. I think it's inconsiderate. I've seen both STella and Beast move threads they deemed inappropriate for boards they modded, and leave notations for readers that enabled those who participated and/or followed those threads to be able to find them. Without such courtesies, users grow resentful. I saw great discussions taking place on 911 which were respectful and illuminating, where points were beginning to be debated in a respectful way, unfortunately, it all got lost in the jumble. Ironically, from what I was able to gather, the overwhelmingly stated desire for a merger of these threads was because so many who were interested in the discussions taking shape, were having difficulty keeping up. Now, we're seeing calls for merger from those who don't even want to take part in those discussions. Well then don't click the thread. DAH!
I think if mods remove, or alter a post, they should at least be willing to own up to doing so, and at least have the courtesy and decency to inform the offender exactly what it is about their post that has been found objectionable and allow them the opportunity to remedy the situation in order to avoid misunderstandings.
If the decision is made to have a political child board, then I truly don't think it should be a matter on 1 mod from either side. Rules are clear whether you are a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Green Party member etc., If somebody posts something you don't like about the party you find yourself affiliated with ...TUFF BEANS! Why should a member of the natural law party scream to the mod who votes natural law that something unsavoury about a natural law candidate is on the board so remove it? That's ridiculous. Furthermore, if the state of partisan politics in the realm most frequently discussed, ...not to mention the level of ignorance to be found vis-a-vis the current state of affairs is any indication, then moderation or board leadership based on partisanship has already demonstrated itself to be a poor, dysfunctional, and unproductive policy. There is already a set of rules, which if actually
adhered to, and applied equally, across the board, the type of continued marginalization, harassment, bigotry, bullying, and hypocrasy that has well proven itself to be fertilizer for the growing animosities we are seeing here, would not continue to grow, and we would be able to have meaningful, enlightening, and co-operative discourse with our neighbours here in Getbig.
I also think that in political posts people naturally have a tendency to get heated, therefore we should all self moderate our statements without purposely trying to piss people off, ...whether overtly or through the passive / aggressive ways so many around here adopt. I also think it's about time we stop attacking the messenger. I also think there are certain established relationships here that provide people with sufficient enough background to know who they can tease and have their playful teasing accepted within the spirit with which it was sent. Those without that history of such an established relationship shouldn't attempt to do so because it will lead to hidden resentments and meltdowns.
There... I've weighed in my 2 cents. What a mouthful, ...but then again, ...I've hardly been known for brevity.
