Should the Meditation Grove stay?

So the following question (and explanation for why the question has been raised) was presented by OMB:

I'm for keeping it. I like that I get to read other people's opinions - ones that differ from my own - and for the most part it's done in a friendly, positive manner. I know that my own knowledge of several subjects has been expanded just from this discussions in this place.

Yes, there are sometimes disagreements that become heated, but that's true for everywhere (even in other parts of the EUC), and we're certainly not as bad as other places. I say keep it. These are sensitive topics, but they are topics that should be discussed, and so the benefits outweigh the detriments, in my opinion.
_________________
I am a Star Wars fan. That doesn't mean that I hate or love Jar Jar. That doesn't mean I hate or love Lucas, or agree or disagree 100% with him. That doesn't mean I prefer the PT over the OT, or vice versa. That doesn't mean I hate the EU, or even love all of it. These are not prerequisites. Being a man is not a prerequisite. Being a geek is not a prerequisite. The only prerequisite is that I love something about Star Wars. I am a Star Wars fan.

I vote for keeping it as well. I like talking about serious issues from time to time, but it's hard to find the right people to talk about them with. The Med Grove is often a good place for it. Like Life said, more often than not these threads are kept under control and there has been some really good discussions. I have also had my knowledge expanded on various issues.

Anyone who doesn't like these discussions can ignore the Med Grove. I'm not a TV guy so I rarely post in the television thread. Similarly if someone doesn't like talking about serious issues doesn't have to post.
_________________

Where sky and water meet,
Where the waves grow sweet,
Doubt not, Reepicheep,
To find all you seek,
There is the utter east.

Master Joined: 15 Apr 2008 Posts: 4402 Location: Korriban

Keep it. As long as people can keep themselves under control I have no problem with it.
_________________
Perfection is a lifelong pursuit requiring sacrifice. The only way to get it quicker is to sacrifice the most.

Master Joined: 11 Jun 2009 Posts: 1346

Keep it. I hate it when communities try to clamp down on political/religious discussion. I personally enjoy reading what you guys talk about. I don't post much anymore, but I like observing the discussion, and from what I've seen, it's civil most of the time. We have this in a special section for a reason, and if someone doesn't like it, they don't need to read it.

Master Joined: 29 Feb 2008 Posts: 745 Location: Denver

I posted my thoughts in the homosexuality thread.

I am in favor of keeping it - maybe shut down temporarily so people can expand on guidelines to help keep it civil (although its hard to do over the long run).

Knight Joined: 07 Feb 2012 Posts: 358 Location: USA

Though I don't comment on some topics, it is interesting to read the views of folks who do. As long as folks are civil and express their views about a topic and not about another person I say keep it.
_________________
"Study art...", said Thrawn.

"Vote for Papa Palpatine".

EUC Staff Joined: 09 Nov 2011 Posts: 1204 Location: Nirn

I'm in favour of keeping it. We need a good healthy discussion on impotent topics, and shutting down MedGro (that's what I'm calling it now. It's cool Wink

) will halt discussion and will probably work it's way into other threads.

I mean, this is a Star Wars Forum. As we all know people have very strong opinions when it comes to the SWEU, and we let them voice their opinions on why TCW should be shut down, why none of the Old Republic should count, LotF shouldn't have happened (I'm just making these up, but have heard them elsewhere) and we discuss. Occasionally it gets out of hand, but things often work themselves out, sometimes with the need of a mod.

Plus, like everyone else said, it's interesting to see what other people think of stuff.

I vote keep.
_________________
There's always a bigger fish - Qui Gon Jinn.

You shall learn that history is an intricate weaving of many events. No one thing can be understood without the proper context.

The best techniques are passed on by the survivors.

Master Joined: 21 Mar 2010 Posts: 813 Location: Maryland

I vote kill it.

Look, we're opinionated people. But let's face it: no amount of debate is going to change anyone's mind on any issue. Once we've made up our minds, they're pretty much made up. This means that the debating will always be circular, because there's no give and take. Yes, sometimes debates do get personal - and I'd like to think that people are smart enough to know when to take a timeout if that becomes the case - but who knows, right?

It doesn't serve a real purpose here, and that's why I think the vast majority of our users don't frequent this section.

Master Joined: 09 Jun 2009 Posts: 1410

I'm with Vile on this one. He's right that it doesn't serve any purpose because it isn't a true discussion where everyone is actually entertaining with an open mind the other POV. The one purpose it does serve is to create drama.

Also, it could be taking away from the Star Wars discussion which is the purpose of this board and something I'd like to see more of.
_________________
Roqoo Depot co-founder.

I already said, but I'll say it again.

I think it should have topics about a specific event or idea instead of about a generalized philosophy, theology political stance or ideology, etc.

for instance the thread about school shootings instead of a thread about guns or media violence. That way it stays focused on one issue that can maybe lead to a fruitful discussion, instead of everyone's personal opinions that can go in all directions.

If it's stay or go I'd rather it go. Almost every MG thread I've ever read has just made be angry or upset with what other members are saying so that I either choose to ignore it and not say what I think or say what I think and potentially create a flame war. I guess it's good for people to be open but I don't see the potential benefit of maybe having an interesting discussion that usually doesn't happen anyway outweighing the almost inevitable conflict between members.

If it stays the way it is now I think it will just be a small group of members that all agree with each other and anyone who disagrees will not want to post there. So for those that want it, it depends on if they think that would be worthwhile to have.

So it seems to me that on the one hand people feel that we need a place exclusively for serious discussion of issues/current events. On the other hand people think it should go because discussions typically just turn into defending ones own position and doing their best to demo the other position without actually listening/considering if they have valid points.

Now heere is my question: what if we reoriented the Grove for only discussion of actual events? Obviously some philosophy would still be present but do you guys think the Grove would produce beneficial discussion if it was only for talking about actual things occuring? For example instead of discussing whether homosexuality is good/bad talk about what's in the news (discrimination, steps taken to address this etc.) or just sharing interesting stuff you may have read ("hey guys I just read about culture X that has a completely different approach and thought you might find it an interesting read too"). All rough examples I'll grant but I hope you get the gist of it.

Anywho I'm going to abstain from voting. To move this forward though it seemed like seeing if there is a compromise we could work out would be better than just a straight majority rules vote on whether to keep the Grove as is or not.

On the voting note would you guys like me to edit the OP to include a poll (I checked and it looks like I can). Assuming it is indeed possible I thought I'd have the following vote options: "Yes keep it as is," "No, it should go" "Yes, but only if the Grove rules are overhauled and the Grove given more specific direction" If you guys like the vote option would these categories be satisficatory or are there other vote options you would like to see?
_________________

The first suggestion: that's a good idea, and I suppose we could give it a trial to see how it goes, if it's successful - though we'd need something at the top of the Grove page so newer members would know the rules.

The second suggestion: a poll would be a more formal counting, yes. I'm for it. Though perhaps we should have a time limit for it?
_________________
I am a Star Wars fan. That doesn't mean that I hate or love Jar Jar. That doesn't mean I hate or love Lucas, or agree or disagree 100% with him. That doesn't mean I prefer the PT over the OT, or vice versa. That doesn't mean I hate the EU, or even love all of it. These are not prerequisites. Being a man is not a prerequisite. Being a geek is not a prerequisite. The only prerequisite is that I love something about Star Wars. I am a Star Wars fan.

Knight Joined: 07 Feb 2012 Posts: 358 Location: USA

A poll is a good idea.

Also, regardless of whether the topics were specific or broad people will be very defensive about their POVs. You'd still have some some folks who would get insulted or angry because others do not agree with them.

Perhaps, a rule could be put in place where people are encouraged to talk about the topics but, not about each other. Also add a stipulation that, if they do throw negative comments at each other (example: calling another person an idiot) then, their comments would be removed.
_________________
"Study art...", said Thrawn.

"Vote for Papa Palpatine".

Page 1 of 3		All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next