Changes To What If Thread Creation

[Slipdigit]

There continues to be a problem with What If threads being created that do not meet the current requirements. The Moderation team has discussed this and while we do not wish to curtail new What If threads, we do want to better monitor the creation of new threads and lessen the likelihood of unacceptable What If threads being generated and then subsequently closed because requirements were not met or the subject has been discussed several times before.

Therefore, effective tonight, all newly created What If threads will be submitted to the moderators for approval before becoming visible to the general forum membership. This will be an automatic procedure. The thread will be created as any other thread, but then it will be put in a queue, invisible to the general forum, to be assessed by a moderator and either approved or disapproved. If approved, it then becomes visible to the general forum members. Once a new thread is approved, follow-on posts may be submitted as any other post and will not need a moderator's approval.

If you have a thread disapproved, you may appeal the decision, or better yet, resubmit your question, making sure to fully flesh out your question as indicated by the guidelines.

We hope that this change will improve the forum and prevent the creation of duplicate topics that have been discussed ad nauseum or topics that are poorly articulated.

If you have questions, please feel free ask.

[urqh]

good eggs chaps well done.

[LRusso216]

Thanks, Jeff. I think this is a much needed change. I had almost abandoned the What If section because some of the comments were becoming inane. I hope this change will lead to more penetrating discussion of alternate history scenarios.

[Devilsadvocate]

Jeff,

Sounds like a very good plan. It should keep some of the sillier "what-ifs' in check.

[brndirt1]

My two cents worth agrees with this. It is sometimes disappointing to see a "what-if" which seems to have an interesting proposition, just to read it and be disappointed. Thank you.

[R. Evans]

Although I'm very new here, I like what you guys are doing with the What If? section. It avoids the "What If The Nazis Had Giant Atomic Robots?" and the like that bog down so many Alternate/What If scenarios.

[SMLE shooter]

Good idea.

[jemimas_special2]

A well thought out plan...

Kuddos Jeff and fellow moderators

Mark

[JagdtigerI]

[A-58]

That's a great move, and well over due. Now if you can do something with new recruits, have some sort of aptitude test before allowing them to post....

[LRusso216]

Well, maybe not an aptitude test, but at least get them to give us an idea of why they are here, besides "I think WW2 is cool".

[Tomcat]

Sounds great.

[formerjughead]

Nice!!!

[Chesehead121]

I'm pretty new here but I think it'd be annoying to have just spammed topics over and over again. Good one, guys.

[Sloniksp]

An excellent idea.

[formerjughead]

Another addendum might be that you need to have a certain number of posts before you can participate in "What If's". At the very least a minimum number to create a "What If".

Just my opinion though.

Brad

[urqh]

And no what if with a "B" in the title... Urqh walks off... Thats the Brit invasion rubbish gone then... They ll never figure it out...

[formerjughead]

Originally Posted by urqh

And no what if with a "B" in the title... Urqh walks off... Thats the Brit invasion rubbish gone then... They ll never figure it out...

what about "What if the Germans invaded the United Kingdom?"
or "What if the Germans invaded England?"
Or "What if the Germans Invaded Scottland and drove south?"

You always have to be prepared for the Smarter Knucklehead.

[urqh]

Yer but im british., they can have the rest..

[Falcon Jun]

Very good development!