[Decision] Alternate history subforum for the VV

**Nikos** · December 16, 2009, 10:39 AM

With the recent banning of all polls and related threads from the Vestigia Vetustasis, I had an idea. A New subforum that would be titled "Alternate History" where polls and other "X vs X" threads would be housed. This way, the main VV forum doesn't become cluttered with such threads and people who like posting in such threads get a place where they can freely do so. Here is the proposal,

Proposer: [user]Nikos[/user]
supporters:[user]davide.cool[/user],[user]Viking Prince[/user],[user]Acco[/user],abbews,SonOfAlexander

New Subforum for the VV, "Alternate History"
The curia recommends that a new subforum be created in the Vestigia Vetustasis for the discussion and posting of topics that discuss alternate or hypothetical historical events or persons.

**Squid** · December 16, 2009, 10:49 AM

Oppose, after getting rid of the garbage you propose to bring it back in a special place created just to hold it?

**Nikos** · December 16, 2009, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by Sqυιd

Oppose, after getting rid of the garbage you propose to bring it back in a special place created just to hold it?

It's not all "Garbage". Sometimes worthwhile discussions take place in such threads. the problem is though, they're not strictly historical which is why I proposed this. A thread about Roman vs Ancient Indian warfare for example isn't historical as they never met, but what if? A worthwhile discussion could be had comparing and contrasting Indian and Roman weapons, warfare, tactics, advantages and disadvantages etc.. I think that if passed, this new subforum would provide ample opportunities for good discussion to take place.

**DAVIDE** · December 16, 2009, 10:51 AM

I totally support this. Why dont we call that subforum as "Uchronia"?

**Nazgûl Killer** · December 16, 2009, 10:57 AM

Oppose. We already have this. http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=1357

**Nikos** · December 16, 2009, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by Nazgûl Killer

Oppose. We already have this. http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=1357

I don't see how Historical fiction is similar to what I'm proposing. Threads comparing and contrasting figures, events and other things in history do not belong in the Historical fiction forum.

**Nazgûl Killer** · December 17, 2009, 06:48 PM

Originally Posted by Nikos

I don't see how Historical fiction is similar to what I'm proposing. Threads comparing and contrasting figures, events and other things in history do not belong in the Historical fiction forum.

Nonetheless, I'm sorry mate, but I see no point to adding more and more forums to make the moderators' lives more difficult. It's just more and more places to look at.

**Nikos** · December 17, 2009, 09:15 PM

Originally Posted by Nazgûl Killer

Nonetheless, I'm sorry mate, but I see no point to adding more and more forums to make the moderators' lives more difficult. It's just more and more places to look at.

I volunteer to moderate the forum if it is ever created if Moderators will feel overworked. And I'm fine with your position, just making sure people realize my proposition is different then the Study.

**Acco** · December 18, 2009, 07:35 AM

I support this.

**DAVIDE** · December 16, 2009, 11:01 AM

and it will have many threads to include in actually. We just have to open VV to see them.

If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
What would have been better: USSR or Czarist Russia?
Who Is Responsible for World War 2? Could It Have Been Avoided?
Han Vs gupta Vs roman, soldiery and tactics.
Which Medieval Army is The Strongest
If the Americans never joined the fight against Hitler, would the Alliess still beat the Nazis?
If Russia joined Central Powers and Ottoman Empire and Austro-Hungary joined Entente in WWI, who would win the war?
If Hitler never stated WW2, could the Allies still win?
who is the greatest napoleon or hitler?
Would the Nazis be successful if they welcomed the jews with open arms

**Viking Prince** · December 16, 2009, 12:12 PM

Despite my esteemed very senior Senior Moderator's comment, I do indeed support this. I would also suggest that the poll is an accesory to the thread. The thread initial post must still create a postion and provide a foundation for future discussion.

For example:

A bad and closable poll thread:

Who is the greatest President?

Choose from the following....

A good poll thread:

Theodore Rooseveldt is one of our greatest presidents because...
(insert a decent essay, some links and sources, etc.)

However, many people believe at the time that Mount Rushmore was carved, TR was included for political and not for actual greatness. I believe that (other dead white guy who was president before TR) should have been on Mount Rushmore instead of TR

In addition to responding in discussion within the thread, please vote in the poll! Which President should have been on Mount Rushmoore instead of TR?

I do believe there should be a place for the second thread (including a poll). Clearly the main VV has been abused with silly polls. This is not just fiction, but also a look at what was done and why it should have been done differantly. In this case Mount Rushmore may have TR simply because he was good pr to promote tourism and that he was friends of the sculpter.

More than four famous faces / Mt. Rushmore, Black Hills tell ...
Aug 4, 2002 ... I thought I would never be able to look at Mount Rushmore without director Alfred Hitchcock sitting on my shoulder, reminding me ... Next comes Theodore Roosevelt. He was a friend of the sculptor, who included the 26th ...