Yet we're able to keep NFL and fantasy football talk from polluting the FFA.Trying to keep politics in a sub-forum would be as frustrating as trying to nail Jello to a wall.
switching peoples votes is not cool52% say we need a political subforum. the people have spoken by an overwhelming majority.
Slow down there, Hillary. 52% against now.52% say we need a political subforum. the people have spoken by an overwhelming majority.
voter fraud.Slow down there, Hillary. 52% against now.52% say we need a political subforum. the people have spoken by an overwhelming majority.
And you know who that would create a lot of work for? - The mods.Trying to keep politics in a sub-forum would be as frustrating as trying to nail Jello to a wall.
no problemTrying to keep politics in a sub-forum would be as frustrating as trying to nail Jello to a wall.
I thought that was where people build up their alias post count.there's no good reason to have a BASEBALL forum. If folded (back) into the FFA, would add only about 5% to thread count (and much smaller % of posts). No reason to ghetto-ize baseball conversation.
I have a dream.There will not be a politics subforum. This is the deadest horse in the FFA.
was it about a bunch of engineers questioning your choices, while standing on top of sky-scraper you didn't know you had designed?I have a dream.There will not be a politics subforum. This is the deadest horse in the FFA.
while in my underwearwas it about a bunch of engineers questioning your choices, while standing on top of sky-scraper you didn't know you had designed?I have a dream.There will not be a politics subforum. This is the deadest horse in the FFA.
So just invade the beisbol forum with all the political threads?oso diablo said:there's no good reason to have a BASEBALL forum. If folded (back) into the FFA, would add only about 5% to thread count (and much smaller % of posts). No reason to ghetto-ize baseball conversation.