Hi Matt,
I've said this before when the hue and cry went out for multiple message boards for a given stock, but feel compelled to say it again. As a stock board manager, I don't think it is a good idea. You stated that there were maybe 2 stocks that could use multiple boards. I ask "why"? I'll answer my own question. It is because folks can't get along on the one board. They lack the ability to "agree to disagree". They cannot, for some reason, just walk away from flame bait.
Now, how often do you think this happens on all the other stock boards? I'll answer again: All the time. It is the board manager's job (or ultimately your's, if the manager fails) to get discussion back to topic.
Can you imagine how confusing iHub would become if every time disagreements happened on every stock board, the easy solution was taken and an alternate board was started. Don't underestimate the power of setting a precedent. You would be on a very thin logical base if you were to allow it for one or two boards, then refuse future requests. Further, how many boards per stock would you allow. One, two, more? The horse would be out of the barn by then. I could absolutely care less what happens on the EDIG board. I do care what happens when it can impact the board I run or others I enjoy frequenting.
I'll close with this: If you allow alternate boards, force the originators to call the board "Stock XXXX Romper Room". I say this because it is clear that the only reason they need a separate board is because they are too immature to participate in an environment where disagreements can happen.
Sheesh ... isn't that why we have "filter". Yeah, I know filter is (or was?) a feature not available for freebies. But what do they expect for nothin'? A rubber biscuit??
AI
