Who wants what groups?

this won't in any way affect My Posts & New Posts, cause that's all i use and am really interested in using

Instead of an "idiot-free" group I suggest an Idiots Only group. In order to get into the group other people on A2k have to nominate you, and once in you can't get out.

that's all I use too.

Robert - who defines idiot?

I would like to see groups similar to some of the old ABUZZ topic sections
ART APPRECIATION
COOKING
GARDENING and PETS
SCIENCE
OUTDOORS

Im easy to please, would I be considered an idiot because Ive been involved in a running argument with another memebr?

I would especially appreciate one dedicated to crossword puzzles. Otherwise, I'm negative on the concept. Groups tend to syphon discussion from the main boards. That's my experience and my opinion.

For Robert's group, I would assume he does.

If you wanted such a group, I assume that you would.

I don't know if I would be allowed in the idiot-free group, but on principle I don't think I would want to be anyway. There are lots of places I can go to only hear people who I agree with. A2K is a place I specifically go to interact with people I don't talk to in any other circumstance.

I would prefer a conformity-free group.

I like Roger's idea - removing some clutter by making specialist groups (puzzlers, water softeners, relationships, etc).

Anyone you don't like, Ican, H2O MAN, etc.?

I like these options.


Well ... are you trying to run an academic marathon with this person? If not, a little jog of a caustic disagreement does not make you an idiot.

rog can i join your syphon discussion group

i can suck with such embouchure it blows

Ah, well Let me put it this way. It was a figure of speech, and not meant to be taken too literally.

Hopefully all discussion within groups will be available for view by all members. Lots of stuff here i dont have an interest in but like that I can view other ideas an any topic that happens to take my fancy. If i want to comment i guess i can apply for member status of that group although I'd probably be too apathetic/ lazy/unmotivated to be bothered in most cases.

I think it a good idea to have groups when bringing in new membership wholesale as has happened in the past. Let em get used to A2K and environs without being tossed into the hurly burly all of a sudden.

I think "Latin" would be appropriate for a group, if I understand the concept
correctly. Very few A2K regulars care about requests for Latin translations,
and currently these requests are quickly voted down to zero.

Well, here's Roberts definition of idiot-free

an idiot-free group, which to me basically just means people who can moderate their extremes and hold a conversation without monopolizing it.

Which leads me to the question Robert; What do you consider monopolizing a thread? Or being extreme?

Are you monopoloizing a thread if your posts take up more than X percentage of the total? Or is that a generic way of saying that if you don't like what a person is saying, that means they are monopolizing? Or being extreme?

What some people may consider monopolizing, others may consider an interesting and educational read.

Same goes for "moderating extremes". By whose standards? Yours? I don't know what your standards are.

That said, I've seen you be both extreme and monopolizing, but I figured that's your privilege.
Each and every one of us are extreme and monopolizing at times.

Like has been said by 2 other posters that I respect, I only look at My Posts and New Posts, and if I don't like the direction a thread is going, I don't read it any more.

I'll have to think about what topics I'd like to see.

How would Groups work?

I assume:
* Each Group would have its own page and all groups would be listed on the
main page of A2K.
* Postings to Groups would appear only on the Group's page.

I wonder:
Would access to the Group need to be approved by a Group Leader?
Would posts to the group be moderated by a Group Leader?

sounds too much like work

Kinda does.