Poll: How Tedious is the Parker Thread now?

[Robin Garr]

Good thinking, Ben. In other words, I agree. No flames from this quarter. The Parker thread, as far as I'm concerned, went wrong only when a sub-thread got into personal attacks. Once that fire died out, I'm with you on the rest.

At the risk of being flamed... well, I enjoyed reading that thread a lot more than this one!

Of course, we might argue "if you don't like the thread, just ignore it", but the truth is that the types of discussion on a forum are part of what creates forum culture (and forum culture is one of the central issues the Parker thread was about to begin with). At least the Parker thread contributed some meaningful discussion too (e.g., on subjectivism/objectivism, blind and panel tastings, retailer/wine journalism/writer ethics), even if it did get get fiery and re-hash age-old Parker/WA issues.

[Robin Garr]

Take another look, Jon. Recent posts in the Parker thread have been only jokes about the length of the thread and the number of posts in it. No need for a lock there. Really, even if I were a fierce and @n@l moderator like ... um, no names needed ... I would have merely pulled out and hidden one angry sub-thread that got both off-topic and uncivil. I had no problem with the rest of the thread, and would have been appalled if this forum had NOT picked up for discussion a wine-related topic that was raging throughout the rest of the wine universe.

Robin..much as I hate to disagree with you, I think Hoke's timing was on the money..there were several posts just minutes before he started this thread and a number of posts after he started this thread..I thinmk it is time you locked down the Parker thread and said ENOUGH!!

That seems appropriate, Robin, since the Parker thread has turned into a joke..I'm off the pulpit and done