• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

General Chat Divided - Yay or Nay

Should General Chat be subdivided?

  • Total voters
    35
Martin

Martin

Active Member
Due to some remarks made in several threads of late, I was wondering about your opinions on something.

Do you think that the General Chat area should be divided into two seperate subfora; one for mindless banter, silly games, cute pictures, etc., and the other for the threads which might garner an actual discussion.

My vote is yes. What is yours?

So, the essential question - should the General Chat area be divided, to separate the BS from the proper non-bookrelated threads?

Cheers
 
i voted yes, i don't think it will work, but i am willing to try anything to keep people content. i will be over in the bs forum with mr michel and his tequila.
 
nope, i think we're fine the way it is. You can go and mix your interest, make yourself smile and the next thread makes you think... why take away that surprise if it is a serious or mindless thread?
 
I voted yes, I like the banter and want to keep it but I try not to spam threads that are serious and want to stay on topic, so this could make it easier all in all.
 
I'll give the thread a week or so, before I present the results (if it's a yes, in the end) to the mods.

Keep 'em coming.

Cheers
 
And

And who gets to decide what is 'bs' and what is 'proper'? What sort of catagories/regulations/restrictions would be set up? Don't get me wrong, I think it's an interesting idea. I am just not sure that it is feasible (and I'm not sure what's wrong with the forums as they are now).
 
Well, Pigeon, that would be up to the mods - I'm only here to pitch the general idea.

Anyway, what's wrong with the boards as they are now (if anything), is that some threads which have a very interesting initial query sometimes get lost in pages upon pages of mindless banter, which is a pity.

The idea would be to restrict the off-topicness to one General Chat Subforum (can't think of a nice name as of yet - The Water Cooler comes to mind), and other non-bookrelated but serious threads would be confined to the other General Chat Subforum, which would be treated in the same way as, say, the Fiction Subforum, or the Authors Discussion Subforum.

Cheers
 
Pigeon, has a good point how and who would decide what's what? I like things as they are now, too and I guess the banter is bothering some people but I wouldn't want to lose it all together.

oops looks like Martin answered that already.
 
it would take all the spontaneity out of conversation. things that pop into your mind would then need to be taken to a new thread and the effect would be lost.

it might work. i'd try it.
 
Why would it? Are the threads and discussions on books in the bookrelated subfora not spontaneous - you can be spontaneous and on-topic, right?

Cheers
 
Martin said:
Why would it? Are the threads and discussions on books in the bookrelated subfora not spontanious - you can be spontanious and on-topic, right?

Cheers
Click to expand...

you try to argue, that's not nice.
 
Why not open a banter thread and then when a conversation is in danger of going too much off topic, you can continue the conversation there?
 
I'm happy with things the way they are in General Chat, but I'd go along with the majority. The only thing I mind is spamming nonsense all over a thread that's going somewhere interesting. But that might happen anywhere I think. It's a matter of sensitivity to the discussion.

Guess what I'm driving at is that banter in General Chat is great. Spamming any thread that has a decent subject and real discussion is inconsiderate, no matter where it is. But I think that's just common sense and courtesy, not something that has to be regulated by division. A thread title should speak for itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top