Current Affairs

[Chris]

We're not having a subforum. I don't know what some of that rubbish is about, I mean who really cares what colour bikini someone has worn? This is probably just another one of those silly fazes that will pass in a few days. :¬:

[Kardan]

We're not having a subforum. I don't know what some of that rubbish is about, I mean who really cares what colour bikini someone has worn? This is probably just another one of those silly fazes that will pass in a few days. :¬:

I can imagine some people won't react too kindly to that But I pretty much agree

[Mark]

Instead of a subforum, just have prefixes like news, celeb gossip, etc

[Jurv]

Shows you how out of tune I am that I got the articles the wrong way round Then fair enough, that can be considered news in my books. I guess it depends what management decides really.

I think the rule of 'If it's true you can post it' isn't strict enough. Does that mean I can post when my auntie turns 40, because I can prove it's true?

i don't think anyone would be interested in that though. i guess threads would have to be based on an important event or important or famous person idek

[Kardan]

Instead of a subforum, just have prefixes like news, celeb gossip, etc

Prefixes are even worse than sub-forums. We really don't need them, it's pretty clear to see what is 'news', and what is 'gossip' (inb4 people say that celeb gossip is news, which, technically, it is )

[Inseriousity.]

Let's make a distinction here between spam and celebrity gossip.

It is my opinion that the current affairs forum should not be restricted to just political news. There are news of all kinds and you post what you're interested in. Tabloids run celebrity gossip all the time so I do not think it is necessary to stop such threads from said forum or that it is wrong for them to be there simply because it is not news you are personally interested in. However, that doesn't mean you can spam the forum with bikini pics and a new thread for each time it happens for example and as far as I know they were rightly merged and spam threads moved accordingly. I also don't think that just because a topic is not serious political debate that it can't be moved in that direction so using the Amy childs example again think you could easily post about a debate on the sexism of tabloid celebrity gossip coverage.

[Aiden]

We're not having a subforum. I don't know what some of that rubbish is about, I mean who really cares what colour bikini someone has worn? This is probably just another one of those silly fazes that will pass in a few days. :¬:

im interested and u say no to most things lol

#killchris

[Mr-Trainor]

I go away for a few hours and the current affairs forum has been spammed. However, this just seems so similar to the whole argument surrounding fast threads. Lets hope this time I don't have to repeat myself five times before someone actually reads what I've said, but there is no need to change the forum structure. There is no need for a sun forum. There is definitely no need for prefixes, and in this case I'd say they'd be worse than a sub forum. Whether you like it or not, whether you find it interesting or not, or whether you think it belongs in that forum or not.. it is still news. However, for those cases where it gets the point of ridiculousness, the current forum rules can deal with it just fine. There is no need for further action and I'm sure this 'phase' won't last long anyway.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I disagree, while their threads aren't my cup of tea - they seem to be getting a fair few replies and it is livening that forum up.

Keep it up I say.

[Aiden]

I disagree, while their threads aren't my cup of tea - they seem to be getting a fair few replies and it is livening that forum up.

Keep it up I say.

no sorry

havnt hx made it clear that they dont want activity

they want dead forums

sorry 2 upset