We are going to be deleting some DU Groups. And we need your help to figure out which ones.

[Skinner]

Last edited Mon Dec 5, 2011, 03:09 PM - Edit history (2)

One of our primary goals of this redesign is to make the smaller forums and groups more active, easier to find, and easier to use. To help achieve this goal, we want to clear out some the "dead wood" -- unused and under-used groups that clutter up the site and make it harder to find the more active groups.

We need your help to figure out which groups to save, and which groups to delete.

There are 142 groups listed (by category) under Topics: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1004

There are another 56 groups listed (by category) under Places: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1239

You can list all of them on one page by viewing the "Forums & Groups" tab in "Show All" mode:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forums&mode=show_all

Here's what we need you to do. If you are an active DU member who registered before January 19, 2011, then you can log in to DU3. If you haven't already, log in using your DU username http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=login and then subscribe to all your favorite groups. (Note: DU2 "small forums" are now designated as groups on DU3, so you can subscribe to those, too.) Just find each group you like, and then click the orange button on that page which says "Subscribe to this group." It looks like this:



You can also help by posting in your favorite groups on DU3. And if you like, you can post announcements in your favorite groups back on DU2 to encourage people to subscribe here on DU3.

You can check the number of subscribers in any group by visiting that group's "About this Group" page. Just visit any group and click the button that says "About this Group," then look for the words "Number of subscribers".

Thank you for your help.

David Allen
DU Administrator

[WhiteTara]

1. Did Gardening get deleted?

I hope not. It's one of my most favorite and seems to be fairly active (by my standards.) Or did my old eyes deceive me and it really is in the list?

Thanks for this site. You are one of my heroes.

[Skinner]

3. Currently it has 75 subscribers.

I think it'll stay.

[juajen]

36. Good, I need to subscribe, but just logged in. I love the gardening group.

[patricia92243]

2. Views AND Posts. I hope you will consider views on a Group as well as posts when making the

decision. Many people read the subject matter but don't necessarily post. Sort of like a poll - it will have 100 votes but only 5-6 actual posts to it.

I love every thing I see so far. But then I am terribly predjudice to DU

PS I can't spell

[Skinner]

4. We will consider many factors when deciding what to delete.

Is there a particular group you are concerned about?

[Lochloosa]

5. I say get rid of the photo group

I mean, how many great pics can you look at? And, dammit, where is my evil grin?

[ellisonz]

6. Here is your evil grin

http://www.du3preview.com/emoticons/index.html

[handmade34]

7. HEY!

another call like that and I'm alerting

[OKNancy]

8. Sports should be one catch-all group

not divided. You could move it under Entertainment I guess

[ellisonz]

10. Agreed.

[Skinner]

12. There is a catch-all group

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1204

[ellisonz]

11. Better idea.

I think you might as well just make a Democratic Politics "Main Forum" alongside Good Reads and Soapbox that includes a Barack Obama group, a Democratic Party Group, and an Elections 2012 Group out of "Democrats" and Government and Elections" to replace GDP. With 2012 coming up it only makes sense and it would also allow hosts to moderate the discussion very effectively while still being centralized.

The major problem in DU1 and 2 wasn't the GDP forum - it functioned like it was supposed too in sorting as much stuff out of GD. The real problem has been GD which doubles as Editorial/OP and News/Flame War Central. The problem is solved. GD is smashed. GDP has seen less use since there's no Dem Primary. The basic concept of GDP is great, in that it separates the domestic political from the domestic and international. I don't think we can make it through election season without it. Doing something like this is essential and would allow for some centralization, but not too much. Elections 2012 could then become 2014 etc. and some alternate forum could be added although I'm not sure how much sheer divisiveness we want to allow out of Soapbox.

[ellisonz]

13. Proposal for Topics Consolidation

Current Line-Up:

23 Topics

Activism (6)
Arts & Humanities (8)
Computers & Internet (5)
Democrats (10)
Economy & Education (10)
Entertainment (7)
Environment & Energy (5)
Foreign Affairs & National Security (4)
Gender & Orientation (6)
Government & Elections (3)
Health (14)
Home & Family (6)
Justice & Public Safety (4) NA NA
Media (3)
Offbeat (3)
People (4)
Race & Ethnicity (6)
Reading & Writing (7)
Recreation (8)
Religion & Spirituality (10)
Science (4)
Sports (6)
Support Groups (3)

Revised:

12 Topics

Activism (6)
Arts & Humanities (8) + Reading & Writing (7) + Offbeat (3) = Rename: Arts, Literature, & Academia - Make "Creative Speculation" its own topic
Computers & Internet (5) + Science (4) + Environment & Energy (5) = Rename: Technology, Environment, & Science
Creative Speculation (1)
Democrats (10) + Government & Elections (3) = Rename: Democratic Politics
Economy & Education (10)
Entertainment (7) - Media (3) = Rename - Music, Cinema, and Television
Foreign Affairs & National Security (4)
Gender & Orientation (6) + Race & Ethnicity (6)+ Justice & Public Safety (4) = Identity & Civil Rights
Home & Family (6) + Health (14) + People (4) + Support Groups (3) = Home, Life, & Support
Recreation (8) + Sports (6) = Sports & Recreation
Religion & Spirituality (10)

Additional Group Elimination, Addition, and Re-Location could be made under this streamlined topic superstructure.

This is just a proposal

[Skinner]

14. That's a good proposal.

We keep going back-and-forth between making the categories broad or narrow. Our purpose for making them fairly narrow is the hope that if someone likes one group in a particular category, they'll likely be interested in some other topics in that same category. The downside is it requires more clicking to browse more folders.

[ellisonz]

15. Thank you Skinner.

I think that most people don't mind the extra click because they're going to that particular category to post in a particular group. The challenge is to get them to go to the category in the first place, if they then decide they like the other groups in that category that's great. Congressional Committees are done like this, with a broad category and then more specific sub-committees.

For example here are links to the House and Senate Committee Structures (if you're not familiar with them, I'd presume you are, but other posters might not be):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Senate_committees
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_House_of_Representatives_committees

If it works for Congress, it can work for DU. I'm not particularly wedded to any of these names and just tried to do the best my organizational skills would permit.

I think with reduction/addition/reorganization of some groups it would be particularly effective.

Mahalo.

[Hutzpa]

17. Careful now

we don't need gridlock at DU but overall your proposal
is imo awesome, so

[ellisonz]

19. The tubes are clogging! The tubes are clogging!

No longer shall the internet function as a series of tubes but as a series of drainage basins filled with the septic waste of Adult Lounges unknown.

[HopeHoops]

16. I'd take the opposite approach. The more the better, but offer a simplification.

For example, I don't give a shit about sports or anything having to do with the Kardashian (sp?) sluts. If we could access a page with a list of ALL groups and use a simple check box to hide the ones we feel are useless, our personal list would be manageable and uncluttered but it would also give us the option to reinstate a group if someone mentions a valid reason to do so. Just a thought. I don't want to piss in anyone's Wheaties because I don't like them (figuratively - I actually like Wheaties).

Tom

[ellisonz]

18. Wouldn't that be a little too...

...self-limiting. For example, I could care less about the Dennis Kucinich group, but whenever I see it there next to the Barack Obama one it reminds me that there are other people here. I think it's good to have to see the diversity of interests as it makes you value your own more - at least this is my experience. But yes, that would be the opposite of my streamline proposal - the self-selecting proposal.

Zach

[HopeHoops]

20. There should be a "view all" option that overrides "ignore group".

[oxymoron]

22. Hi, Skinner. I was hoping for a new Buddhism group. I'd be happy to host.

Currently all we have is "Seekers on a Unique Path". Buddhism is the fourth largest religion in the world and one of the fastest growing in the West. Any possibility? I'd be happy to host it.

[Skinner]

23. Remind me in a few days.

We kind of have our hands full right now. But I am happy to add your group.

[oxymoron]

24. Cool! Thanks! n/t

[oxymoron]

54. Hi Skinner, you wanted me to remind you of the Buddhism group that I had proposed.

I know you have your hands full, but just wanted to follow up. I would like to host, if possible. I know it's going to bring a lot of cool people to DU. Just let me know what you need from me. BTW, really digging DU3! Thanks.

[oxymoron]

61. Hi Skinner, just checking in.

Not sure the best way to reach you. There seems to be a lot of interest in this group. Let me know if you need anything from me.

[MindMover]

45. good suggestion....thanks

[La Lioness Priyanka]

25. this one should be deleted. there is only one thread and its about deleting it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1169

[William769]

26. I agree.

[racaulk]

41. I was just about to post this here.

I agree, I don't think this group serves a purpose any longer considering the new moderating structure of DU3. This group was largely abandoned and unused at DU2 anyway. The topics discussed here can easily be covered under the LGBT group.

I am in favor of deleting the group you linked.

[oldhippydude]

27. Hey skinner

some time ago when MSNBC was giving Keith Oberman problems, i subscribed to the group, in the hope that i could keep track of him.. alas im not sure there were any posts from that ime on.. i dearly love Keiths show (in fact have made extrodinary efforts to get in on my tv) but the truth is now that the group as it stands is pretty much dead wood..

love Keith and Cenk on current,,

[ellisonz]

30. You might be interested in this discussion:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=4940

PM Nancy Waterman and you guys could come up with a great group together.

[jschurchin]

28. Here's a suggestion David

Dump this new software. I have been coming to the Democratic Underground since 2004, and been a member since 2005. To say the site has taken a huge step in the wrong direction would be a understatement.
Did you guys go to the Coca Cola school of formula change?

[Nancy Waterman]

29. Suggestion for a new forum

"Media at the Moment"

If someone wants to post about something that is happening now on TV or radio or just happened.

Or maybe notify others about who will be on later in the evening. Or discuss a debate or interview as it happens.

[Auggie]

31. Definitely consolidate Baseball and Football into Sports...

those groups have been pretty much dead for years

[trumad]

32. Agree

consolidate sports into one.

[fishwax]

34. I disagree -- Football has been more active in DU3 than it ever was in DU2

There have been more posts in there in the last week than in years. Given that part of the point of DU3 is to make some smaller forums more accessible, I'd like to see whether football will survive on its own. I don't think there's any need to be hasty about it.

I don't know about baseball--I don't think it's been as busy, but of course it's the offseason ...

[ellisonz]

39. Sports are seasonal.

I also strongly object to basketball not having a forum if the status quo continues.

How about:
American Sports - NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, and NCAA.
International Sports - "Football", Olympics (2012 Summer is around the corner), Rugby, Cricket.
Not-Sports - NASCAR and Golf -

[fishwax]

40. true, but there'd been less than 20 posts since the start of the 2010 season on the old DU

It's much more active here thus far. Maybe that will continue and maybe it will die off, but I don't think they should kill it before we really know.

I don't know why there was never a basketball group on the old DU--not as many basketball fans, I guess? I wouldn't mind a basketball forum, though.

Not-Sports - NASCAR and Golf -

[El Supremo]

43. Agree

Even though I hate some sports, they all should be in one forum.

[maddezmom]

33. Hoping the Cancer Support Group can stay

doesn't have a lot of subscribers but I think it is a place we should keep. Just my 2 cents.

[Mister Ed]

35. Let's delete the College Republicans group.

I know we're trying to be inclusive and have a Big Tent and all, but honestly, there's just no reasoning with those guys.

[Maeve]

37. Irish Affairs is probably a waste of bandwidth

We posted on it at DU2 around St Patrick's Day and that was about it (and this from someone who is professionally Irish)

[HopeHoops]

38. Support groups needs some more groups - Drug & Alcohol, child abuse, abused spouse, etc.

[HopeHoops]

42. I'd still like a Fractals, Mandelbrot, and Julia sets group.

I'll host it. A few of us like to post images we have created, but I've been deeply involved in the underlying mathematics for 25 years. It would mostly be a geeks forum, but the pictures are incredible and inviting. Please consider it - probably under the Science group.

[MindMover]

44. I say leave all the groups and add more

why take away groups???

is a group taking up server space???

have as many groups as people want to have groups....

I guess if a group hasn't had activity in it for 6 months or 12 months, you could say it was a dead group....

[unc70]

47. Agree. Be very reluctant to remove any groups for 4-6 months

It will take most of us at least that long to recover from the culture shock of the new version and to reconfigure, "re-"subscribe, and otherwise get back up to speed in this new environment.

Some things I like better, but there are many things from the previous DU that I miss and will need to "find" some equivalent or alternative within the new system, or maybe I just need more experience using DU3 so the new or the different can become the familiar. Unfortunately for me, my personal life and professional obligations are such I have little opportunity for even a quick glance at DU much less to get up to speed as a competent user. Maybe in a couple of months.

Before I can do much of that, I will need to do considerable testing and security auditing to see which, if any, browsers are safe with the new DU and what options and settings should be used. I am optimistic that the new DU will do reasonably well under this testing; prior versions have worked well using very limited browsers that support simple HTML and little more (no scripts, style sheets, plugins, etc.). In the past, Skinner, et al have been careful and avoided the problems that have plagued most sites. I expect nothing less from them going forward. I will be disconsolate if proven wrong.

Not that I haven't whinged about this and that here at DU over the years, most often regarding what I saw as coordinated efforts by other DUers to control, disrupt, limit, and steer discussions regarding candidates or hot topics -- and with what at times seemed misuse of the old Alert system. Somehow for over a decade, DU has continued to be relevant and an important resource for progressives in spite of the worst of our collective and individual behavior, of our emotions overwhelming our civility, of our egos driving us to "win" the argument in discussions, often battling endlessly over nits while distracting others from some important issue -- burying a few insightful posts under an outpouring of drivel. That is why I and so many of you care about what happens here, that those in the MSM and elsewhere look at DU to understand progressives and liberals, and that those wishing to influence what we think, believe, and do are active as DUers in support of their own interests, causes, and candidates. DU matters.

I personally have found DU at its best when researching and explaining some complex news story. Within the DU community on almost any topic, we have multiple members who are experts in its various aspects, who know the places and people involved, and who are incredible researchers on the Net and elsewhere. Plus lots of eyes looking for what is missing: the little-known connections among political, media, and corporate elites; the buried info in corporate financial filings; the nearly forgotten report no longer available on the net but not lost because a DUer had prudently saved a copy; and on and on. WMD. Wall Street. ... DUers have documented so much and so early, it's just frustrating when what most of us already knew has been ignored by nearly everyone else.

Running a large site like DU is challenging at best, a political one even more so. We need a strong and open DU going forward; I hope we have it and that the recent changes make it more effective with greater participation than before.

P.S. Over the years, DU has lost too many of its most-insightful members. Sadly, many have died, their experience, wisdom, and perspectives no longer available. Some others were driven out or were banned from DU because they repeatedly broke the site rules. Several of those who were either banned or who quit posting for other reasons had been among the best informed and most articulate in support of controversial positions here on DU. Most of them ran afoul of rules regarding personal attacks and such. In some cases, those banned appeared to have been targeted by DUers with opposing views who deliberately attempted to provoke an inappropriate response in order to get the target DUer banned. (While hardly at that level, I avoided several obvious attempts to provoke me; I was careful and lucky not to rise to the bait.) Those most emotional regarding some issue are probably also those most likely to get caught up in debating that subject and not notice the risk from how their responses might appear to outsiders. In almost every instance, those who were most cynical have now been proven right, many who ridiculed them have now been exposed as frauds and provocateurs.

In a couple of cases, there were posts at RW web sites bragging about how someone RW had infiltrated DU and then gotten some prominent DUer banned from DU. The new jury system should greatly reduce (eliminate?) the extra power of certain volunteer moderators over the last few years. Still possible, but much harder now to "game" the system with a few like-minded volunteers able to expel their opponents. It will be interesting to see how the dynamic "jury" handling alerts will change the culture at DU, how it might influence individual postings, and how it should keep any group from becoming dominant at DU. (From the rules, I suppose that longtime members that post regularly, thus likely jurors, will become the new target identities for groups hoping for power and control at DU. Hope enough of the safeguards work to thwart any such efforts.)

In light of the New DU and the new paradigm for moderation/jury, I wish at least a few of those who are now banned or discouraged could work with the DU Admins to rejoin and again enrich our community, The New DU. Now more than ever, we need everyone. It is solely the decision of the DU Admins, and I believe should only be considered after 3-6 months using the new system and working out any unexpected issues from using the juries. We need more that brings us together, less that drives us apart. We, not me or you.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

49. Yes, Yes, YES

everything you just said.

[Behind the Aegis]

46. I hope the Jewish group won't be removed.

I know it doesn't have many followers at all. I think 8 so far. It also isn't a "mover and shaker" of a forum, but I do feel it is an important group.

[usregimechange]

48. As long as we keep the state groups and the science group I'm fine

[Irishonly]

50. I would hope the Cancer Support, Disaility and Chronic Chronic Conditions and support groups remain.

Some of them are small and not as active as the larger groups but they serve a wonderful purpose.

[oberliner]

51. Delete the I/P group and allow discussion of Israeli/Palestinian issues in the main forums

I think DU3 can handle it.

[Skinner]

52. We allow it when there is big news.

This is a more liberal standard than we had on DU2.

[Behind the Aegis]

57. BAD idea.

[awoke_in_2003]

53. Please do not get rid of the Atheist and Agnostic group...

for a lot of us, especially those of us in the bible belt, this is the only area where we can say what we think without fear of reprisal.

[JNelson6563]

64. I can't imagine that happening

It's a pretty active group! See ya there!

Julie

[RZM]

55. Sibel Edmonds and Other Whistleblowers

Last edited Sun Dec 18, 2011, 11:26 PM - Edit history (1)

Whistleblowing stuff seems to mostly go in GD anyway.

There's only one post in there right now. It's a story based on a recent assertion made by Edmonds herself that's dubious, to say the least.

[Joe Shlabotnik]

56. 2 points

I agree with an earlier post that maybe we should wait for 4-6 months. Some people don't transition as fast as early adopters, and making considerations or decisions especially over the holiday season is NOT a good idea. Give it until early spring.

And secondly, (on a more personal note), I'd like to see to Canada group remain, even though it may not have a huge amount of members. There are many that have dual citizenships, or relatives on both sides of the border, and the countries are extremely closely linked by politics, economics, legalities, foreign affairs, and culture.

[glinda]

60. Defiantly keep the Canada Group. Am in MN.& want to know what is going on there. Friends there.

[Neoma]

58. Combine the following:

American History and World history can be put into the Non-fiction book group (They barely talk about anything else BUT history) or simply combined into "history." The same could probably be said of Anthropology, because they've only talked about history so far... Take out LGBT Civil Rights and Activism, because I think everyone goes to just LGBT anyways.

And maybe add the folder People to Race & Ethnicity...and just call it Race, Ethnicity and People? Or not...whatever.

[truedelphi]

59. Sorry to be off topic - but where does one go to

"Ask the Admins"??

I was offered a jury duty assignment several nights ago. (About 12:15 Am Calif time.) I clicked that I would do it.

Then I was offered the chance to click to go to the post, but when I clicked that button, it took me to a page that said
"No such post exists."

Tried again. It was a loop. So I Finally asked to be let free from jury duty...

The board itself was up and functioning - just not that one link.

[Chan790]

63. Help & Meta-discussion n/t

[Tripod]

65. Please donot delete the Addiction & Recovery group.

I like it here, and so do others. Thanks Skinner. I love bounce!

[MarilynC]

66. I want to run against Michele Bachmann

I live in Bachmann's district. I found the DU through a search and I have read that no one has the 'courage' to run against Bachman in this district. Even though the media has shown that people don't want her in office...I don't want to be a person that is voted for just to get her out. The only reason I am replying in this fashion, is I have just joined this forum. I have been away for a while, but I am back after serving in the Air Force for 20 years and traveled abroad for the past 3 years, teaching. There are no skeletons in my closet. I have the time to do this. This is my state. This is home.

Never been in politics as a candidate, but dealt with them as a member of the Air Force. I am not in this for a career. I want to do this.

[MH1]

67. Hi Marilyn & Welcome to DU!

I wish you good luck if you do run against Bachmann. I'm not in her district but I despise her.

You may want to post this in the Minnesota forum: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1059

Also, try General Discussion or Politics 2012 (look to the left and you will see those forums listed near the top).

Posting in those other forums will probably get you more visibility. Not many come to the Announcements forum very often, strangely enough. (I just wandered by on a whim.)