So long

[Serial_Apologist]

I would also agree

Why does all discussion have to be conducted in the same way?
Why do people feel threatened by those who don't take themselves too seriously?

There is a "script" behind this IMV (apart from the status of the forum issue), I wonder what some of the folks who don't like this place would make of some of the comments on social media of many of the musicians that they idolise?

But maybe we should all "grow up" and join the civilised debating society?

I thought I'd found it. <whistle>

[french frank]

If that's all you think it has been, I'm not surprised that you should wish to be rid of the inconvenience. I would see it somewhat differently. For me it's been pleasurable and enlightening to read the consistently serious contributions made here by several people, and to take part in discussions which have often caused me to form more coherently and with more supporting evidence what my thoughts and opinions are on some issue or other.

Clearly, you find it easier to ignore the the ones that aren't serious.

I feel the opposite: arguments (and even evidence) which results in conclusions which don't coincide with either principled or instinctive views are simply ignored.

And people wheel out the old 'no such thing as right and left'. Call them up and down, in and out: there are only two sides of the fence. In fact you (who as I made it clear, I had no quarrel with), as I see it, find common ground with those you agree with, who are coming from the same place.

But, as I said, if you want to continue the debates with the same people, PM them and invite them to follow you on to your alternative forum(s). I wonder who would get the invitations and who wouldn't?

[jean]

We'll be worried now when we don't!

[MrGongGong]

there are only two sides of the fence.

Fence?

Q: How many free jazzers does it take to change a lightbulb?

A:Who needs changes man?

What's with the whole "serious" thing anyway?

[french frank]

What's with the whole "serious" thing anyway?

Gongers, you're the Katie Derham of political debate. She presents on R3 as if it's all supposed to be funny.

[ahinton]

Gongers, you're the Katie Derham of political debate. She presents on R3 as if it's all supposed to be funny.

I thought that we weren't supposed to post derogatory remarks about R3 presenters on this forum! I must have missed the rule change about that! But, since you've started this and this part of the fourm is about to come to its end as 2014 does the same, do tell us who you think might be the Suzy Klein, Sara Mohr-Pietsch and Sarah Walker of political debate here (but please feel free to keep your own counsel about who might be the Clemency Burton-Hill thereof); it might make a nice send-off to this part of the forum!

[MrGongGong]

Gongers, you're the Katie Derham of political debate. She presents on R3 as if it's all supposed to be funny.

There's a difference IMV in taking things seriously and taking yourself seriously.
I don't think everything is funny or should be seen to be
BUT I do think much of what many folks spout in the course "political debate" is ridiculous, pompous and worthy of ridicule.

(at least I don't "conduct" like KD :whistle: )

[french frank]

I thought that we weren't supposed to post derogatory remarks about 3 presenters on this forum!

Was that derogatory? If I'd said, Gongers you're as [supply personally derogatory description] as KD, that would be derogatory. I felt that she was inappropriately flippant in presenting Zaïs last week - but I would call that critical rather than derogatory, and of her presentation not of her personally.

Oh, you meant comparing her to Gongers? Point taken. :-)

[ahinton]

Was that derogatory? If I'd said, Gongers you're as [supply personally derogatory description] as KD, that would be derogatory.

Sure, but the flippancy that you draw attention to and the shallowness to which you don't other than by implication are so characteristic of her that "derogatory" was not so far short of the mark, I think and with good reason.

I felt that she was inappropriately flippant in presenting Zaïs last week - but I would call that critical rather than derogatory, and of her presentation not of her personally.

Quite, but negatively critical nonetheless, as I'm sure you'd agree and, whilst I did take it to be of her presentation and not of her personally, the two are not entirely separable, I fear...

[Anna]

If I may say something about the closure of the P&CA forum.
I haven't said a lot here, but I have read a great amount. In fact I think I have got more heated about recycling (and why don't the English do it?), and green issues. However, it was quite fun, although exhausting jousting, with the kippers and trade barriers and, I really have to say this, I always found Richard's contributions about Marxism most interesting, if incomprehensible in the execution thereof. I will miss the occasional thought provoking views.

I will not miss the Yahboo Sucks! My Dad is bigger than your Dad, I'll see you Jimmy, outside, banter

[ahinton]

I think I have got more heated about recycling (and why don't the English do it?)

Oh, but they do, they do! - even certain Scots living in England do it! - OK, not all of them in either case, admittedly, but recycling is not a Welsh monoply issue, you know! (although were the Ladies of Powys to contemplate recycliing Herefordistan "I wouldn't be at all surprised", as Dorothy Parker once said in a quite different context)...

[Daniel]

Although I'm an irregular contributor and don't expect my words to carry much weight, I'll leave them anyway.

I must say I sympathise with french frank's position, she has set up a forum with certain purposes in mind, and finds it is also being used for other purposes which in various ways cause her some stress. It seems reasonable that she wants it to stop.
But I would also say I have found the P&CA forum a source of much intelligent political debate, and would not agree that comments here don't change anything (as ff suggested elsewhere). I think some of us reading, and who knows even some taking part, may find themselves changed slightly as a result of what is said here.

I'd agree with the example of Marxism mentioned above, and some of aeolium's posts have been for me fascinating in revealing fresh angles on situations, some of Beef Oven's flying in the face of the prevailing tendency here have also been dynamic and revealing. They are just some examples but there are many other posters who also have very interesting things to say.

The yah-boo-sucks stuff seems to enter human debate in all spheres, not just in the twilight world of the P&CA forum, but as I understand it this is what most bothers ff and she feels reflects badly on the for3 org, as well as PM's to her complaining about other members have said. These things must be stressful and I can empathise with sbdy wanting them to stop, we only have so much energy to give any one thing (and this 'thing' is after all ff's), but I personally will miss the debate here and feel the forum will lose an integral part of its very engaging character when it goes.