Who wants what groups?

At this point I'm completely guessing. But the impression I've formed is something like: person A starts group, and invites people B through K to join it. Then person L asks to join, and person A approves or denies that request.

In that scenario, person L would know that his or her request was denied.

That's if person L makes the request in the first place though, which of course he/she might not.

Again, I'm really guessing at this point.

But there would be no difference to the general (access to all) threads?

...I don't think so, but I'm also not sure I understand your question.

I think the general A2K board would continue as always, and then there would also be these groups.

Thanks, soz, that's what I wanted to know.

Sure thing.

btw I went back to Robert's first post and he seems to be saying that while the whole "person A starts a group and invites..." part will be happening down the line, that's not how it would happen right off. It'd be more like, "Person A tells Robert that they'd like a group and what it would be about [and maybe who would be in it], and he gets things started."

How about a "Really Cool People" group?

I was surprised to see 'relationships' on this list, but then realized that one member's favorites is somebody's clutter. It's also true that some themes, like relationships, are more prone to drive-by attacks by those who think they're being witty. The more I thought about it, the more I thought that relationships may be a good candidate for a separate group. But then, it would close out comments from those who do have something helpful to say in a particular case but don't want to be in the group (or are excluded from the group) by the originator. I'm not sure it would be an overall improvement.

I never open the riddles or water softener threads. Do they generally get trolled with inane comments?

hey, i resemble that remark

how could the general A2K board continue as always if group topics are taken away from the board?

I'm curious to see how this would pan out.

Not optimistic, but curious.

Why would you propose a group from which you would automatically be excluded?

Do you mean that a group would be by invitation only and that its goings on would be separated from the board?
If thats the case, I vote no because I sometimes want to learn about something that is just brought up as a thread. If its kept as a secret society, I think its message will be "no farmermen desired" .

I would be inclined to join any group that included

I think the key to this all is seeing it as a response to the needs of the
Phil Forum Folk. This gives them a way to segregate themselves, regulate
who posts, and moderate their own forum by their own standards.

The rest of A2K would still be free to post philosophical topics, tag them,
and be able to find them by tags. These posts would reside entirely
outside of the Phil Forum. As for those within the Phil Forum group,
they could post to these "open" A2K threads or not, as they they saw fit.

On another note:

If having a Latin group would require our usual one-off questioner to
register with A2K, apply for membership to the group and then wait for
confirmation before making his/her request for a translation, then I no
longer think a Latin group would be a good idea.

How about one on incontinence? or maybe funetic speling?

oh, I totally get that.

totally

Yes, niches like that would work well. Did you want to run a latin group?

Rather say the petty complaints of the philosophy refugees. I don't think they like a situation in which people can come along and tell them what fools they are. If they had their own group, would the be allowed to exclude Fresco? Fresco tells them they're full of it on a regular basis, and he has been a member for years, with an obvious deep and abiding interest in philosophy, and arguably a very wide and deep textual knowledge.

Would they be able to exclude him just because he so often points out their gross errors? Keep in mind that many of the philosophy refugees heap scorn on many of their fellow refugees for their ignorance and their vacuous blather.

Yeah, but . . .

If having a Latin group would require our usual one-off questioner to
register with A2K, apply for membership to the group and then wait for
confirmation before making his/her request for a translation, then I no
longer think a Latin group would be a good idea.

I think far too many people could get forum based contact infections from reading or scrolling near incontinence related threads so it's an imperative to isolate them before they infect everyone with their unsanitary threads.

Then again, I may be uneducated on the entire subject.