Debates, proposals, complaints, (dis)agreement with moderator's decisions

[Platypus]

I would suggest limiting mega survivors to 5 active threads, and only having one active at a time. Another possibility is pinning active survivors so they're always on page one, and so that people who create new survivors know their thread will be on page two until a slot opens up. To make this work, the inactivity window would need to be closer to a week.

[Platypus]

Thinking of doing a city survivor; 150 cities worldwide, 5 groups of 30 either randomly assorted or by region, top 6 in each group going into a final 30.

[Platypus]

I've made an illegal and unilateral pronouncement in the Languages of the EU survivor, re: subtracting 2 votes.

My authority is basically that I did the WLS so screw you n00bs.

[Platypus]

He had been inactive in it. As he has now returned, I'll delete my post.

You're all still n00bs.

[Platypus]

I don't support homely or vazdul's proposals, largely because they seem to make far too much work for Fab and are likely to fail in the medium term anyway.

I also don't support opening the floodgates, so to speak, and being overtaken by "Favourite My Little Pony Ponies" or "CFL Quarterbacks" survivors.

But, I think there can be genuine socio-political interest in sports survivors, at least as much if not moreso than film survivors. But where do we agree on the arbitrary line being drawn?

My solution is to maintain the status quo, but require an introduction in the first post of a survivor explaining the socio-political context of the survivor. If it cuts the mustard, and isn't just a legalistic excuse for putting something irrelevant in, it could go ahead. This would mean that survivors with next to no context, such as Bond Girls or CFL Quarterbacks, would be allowed to be posted - and would then be allowed to be locked. It gives fab the power to keep the board reasonably on-message; it doesn't create more work for him or extra steps for the community (other than the Survivor creator himself), and it gives every topic a chance.

So, call it 2b, I guess.

[Platypus]

I think the new rules are a perfectly reasonable compromise.

I'll shortly start a new 'parliaments' survivor, possibly for southern Africa; would that be 'on-topic'? I suspect it would be, but just checking.

Also, Navigators and Conquistadors is historically related to politics but our current opinions of them are not overly political. I'd probably accept it as on-topic but I could understand it not being considered as such. I also think the turnout will probably be very, very low.