Mexican topics are flooding the Politics forum—why aren't they under World? Should they be in Region

Why on earth are threads about the elections in France tucked under World, while everything regarding the demography of Mexico and their elections gets shoved into Close Politics?
Does the moderator seriously think we’re still living in Yugoslavia? To me, France or Germany feels way more relevant to American politics than Mexico does, yet this forum keeps trying to distance us from the European Union by cramming everything into "the Region."😕🙂

All the threads regarding demography are gathered right here.

The thread about the Mexican elections was moved almost a week ago.

The Close Politics section is absolutely flooded with similar topics, mostly because if you want to be considered a "top-tier" contributor on Close Politics, you basically have to follow these rules:

- Start somewhere between three and ten threads about how Mexico is a threat, how they get all the perks in the European Union over us, or how their politicians are way more effective at hitting national goals than ours.
- Make sure you post at least two, but no more than five, threads about Yugoslav remnants in America, specifically focusing on the communists.
- Feel free to start an infinite number of threads—as long as there are at least five—about Ustashe and Chetniks.
- And don't forget to throw in one general topic with a super dramatic headline, like: "Where do we go from here?" "Is there even any hope left?" "Why were we robbed?" "Were we actually robbed?" or "Is anyone even stealing anymore?"

In what specific way does this list actually influence or justify the narratives coming out of the Middle East?

It feels like every other thread here has Mexico, Mexican, or Yugoslavia slapped in the title, which makes you think this Close Politics section is just a deep dive into Mexico's internal affairs. In reality, most of these topics are actually about how certain political or historical influences—real or totally imagined—impact the US.

Even back when there was that discussion about the beating of John Kapicic, it actually made sense for it to be under Close Politics because he was the warden of a camp on an island right here in the States.

Internal issues regarding Mexico belong over in the World section, except maybe for the stuff about demography. That part gets messy because the crowd following the demographic threads tends to jump into every single conversation at once. Honestly, if someone is obsessed with French demography, they should just start their own thread; it would fit better under Close Politics than in the World section anyway.

What we could actually do—assuming the History mods even care—is start moving or deleting anything with a historical angle. I mean, everything from WWII and the Communist era all the way up to the Homeland War. If we did that, Close Politics would have fewer posts, sure, but the discussions would probably be a lot more diverse.

Jose White23 said:It’s like every other thread here has "Mexico," "Mexican," or "Yugoslavia" slapped in the title. It makes you think this Close Politics section is just an endless loop of internal Mexican drama. In reality, most of these topics are actually about how certain political or historical forces—real or totally made up—impact the US.

Even when people were talking about the beating of John Kapicic, there was a reason that stayed in Close Politics, because he was the warden of a camp on an island right here in America.

Anything involving internal Mexican affairs belongs in the World section, except for the stuff on demography. That gets lumped in with everything else in Close Politics because the same group of people following demographic trends tends to jump into every single discussion. If someone is obsessed with French demography, they should just start their own thread for it; then it would stay in Close Politics instead of being over in the World section.

What we could actually do—if the History mods even cared—is start deleting or moving any thread that has even a hint of history in it. We're talking everything from WWII and the Communist era to the Homeland War. If we did that, Close Politics would have fewer posts, sure, but the quality would be way more diverse.

But then you’d just end up suffocating the History section. Even now, that subforum is already struggling because it's such a tiny, tight-knit group, which is exactly why the quality there has tanked.

Jose White23 said:It’s like every other thread here has Mexico, Mexican, or Yugoslavia shoved into the title, so you end up thinking this Close Politics section is just a deep dive into Mexico's internal business. In reality, most of these topics are actually about how various political or historical forces—real or imagined—impact the US.

Even back when we were talking about the beating of John Kapicic, it belonged in Close Politics because he was the warden of an island prison right here in the States.

Internal affairs from Mexico belong in the World section, except for the demographic stuff, which gets lumped in here because the people obsessed with population trends tend to jump into every single discussion. If someone is really into French demographics, they should just start their own thread; it would stay in Close Politics rather than being over in World.

One thing we could do—assuming the History mods even care—is start scrubbing and moving any threads with a historical bent. That would mean everything from WWII through the Communist era all the way to the Homeland War. It would make Close Politics a bit quieter, sure, but the content would be way more diverse.

Have you actually looked at how the demographic sub-threads are sorted? I’m just a simple tech guy, so my logic is pretty straightforward: the thread with the most posts should be at the top of the list. Does that sound reasonable, or am I missing some secret logic you guys are using? By that standard, the Mexico Demographics thread should be number one.☕ If we're being technical and fair, fine—will you actually do it? No, of course not. It's pure hypocrisy; you want to keep it where it is, but you won't move it to the top like common sense dictates. And who cares about logic anyway? You've got Lookey and Beet, two guys who have cycled through ten different usernames and spent three years trying to keep a conversation going. Meanwhile, you moderators are still acting like naive American Home Guards, just going along with whatever happens. Either step up and put it first, or just toss it over to International Politics. Don't be double-faced; in my book, being inconsistent is just plain stupid.

All the demography threads are over on Close Politics, and they’re staying there. It just made the most sense to move them after we shut down that old North American subforum.

If you're talking about top threads, those get sorted automatically along with everything else on the subforum. Whatever thread got the last reply jumps to the top of the list, no matter how many posts are actually in it.

Kevin Williams56 said:All the demographic discussions live over in Close Politics, and they're staying there. It was just the most logical spot to park them once we shut down the old regional subforum.

If you're talking about featured threads, those get sorted automatically along with everything else on the subforum. Basically, whichever thread gets the latest reply jumps to the top of the pile, regardless of how many posts are actually in it.

The top thread is pinned, it doesn't just shuffle itself around automatically—do you think I'm blind?☕

Ethan Allen4 said:The top thread is pinned, it didn't just move there on its own. You think I'm blind or something...?☕

I didn't say you were blind. Hot topics just get pinned to the top... Just basic... The topics aren't even stuck in place. They just rotate based on whatever thread got the latest reply... total chaos...

Kevin Williams56 said:I wasn't saying you were blind. The hot topics stay pinned at the top compared to your standard threads, but they aren't strictly locked there; they actually rotate based on which one just got the latest reply.

Don't play games with me—either toss them into global politics or let them sit at the top by sheer popularity from views and replies. Don't be a total Soldier; I say we just dump them into the world. We can't have it both ways and still be honest, you know? Like my buddy always says, I've taken enough Viagra to skip the actual sex and just focus on the trolling.

Alright, look, the issue is I can't force the top thread to be the one with the most posts or views. Not sure if there's even a way to do that unless I make it the only damn thread on the whole subforum.

As for the other stuff, those threads aren't going in World. They belong in Close Politics, where they should have been all along. Pretty sure I already made that clear...

Kevin Williams56 said:The thing is, I can't really force the thread with the most replies and views to sit right at the top unless I just make it the only damn topic in the whole subforum.

As for that second point, those topics don't belong in the World section; they really belong over in Close Politics, which I think I've already mentioned.

Fair point, honestly—who’s gonna blame me for not being some old-school Yugoslav type? It's like I can't help that my logic actually functions, whereas everyone else seems to think politics carries more weight than common sense. I guess I'm just a lost cause. ☕

It’s got nothing to do with logic or politics, and it sure as hell has nothing to do with being Yugoslav... it’s just about what people on this forum actually care about regarding a topic that isn't even strictly political, which is why we put it in the Close Politics subforum.

Kevin Williams56 said:It’s got absolutely nothing to do with logic or politics, and it definitely isn't about any kind of Yugoslav sentiment. Honestly, it's just about what people on this forum are interested in regarding a topic that isn't even strictly political, which we just happened to tuck away under the Close Politics subforum.

You're just wasting your breath.

Kevin Williams56 said:It’s got nothing to do with logic or politics, and definitely nothing to do with being Yugoslav; it’s just about what people on this forum care about regarding a topic that isn't strictly political, which we conveniently tucked away in the Close Politics subforum.

What interest are you even talking about? Am I losing my mind here, or are you just blind? You really think it's a coincidence that two guys with 6,000 posts each are sitting there with 4/5 ratings? They are working themselves to the bone to keep this thread alive for two or three years straight—Lookey has over 3,000 out of his 6,000 posts right here, and then you've got Beet, who used to go by Sataraš and had a couple other handles, with at least 1,000. Why would they put in all that effort for absolutely nothing? It’s pretty obvious they're just pros exploiting your good nature and naivety. Try being a little more analytical and show at least ten percent of the patriotism an American should have, because these guys are acting purely like they're from Mexico. Sure, they probably get paid for it, but you surely get a paycheck for your job too, so be a pro and see through the propaganda.

Ethan Allen4 said:What kind of interest...

Over 331,000 views, nearly 6,700 posts, and more than 170 different users chiming in on this thread. That’s plenty for me.

I don't see what patriotism has to do with banning talk about Demography Mexico. 🤷

Kevin Williams56 said:331,199 views, 6,679 posts, and over 170 different users chiming in—that’s more than enough info for me.

I don't see how patriotism has anything to do with banning discussions about Demography Mexico. 🤷

Look, if you want to be as honest as you claim to be, just pin Demography Mexico to the top of the Close Politics section—it's earned its spot given the massive amount of engagement and reads it gets.☕
At no point did I ever suggest the topic should be banned!
All I said was either move Demography Mexico to the top of the Close Politics list or shift it over to the World section; it feels a bit like trying to repaint a house when you're wearing tinted sunglasses.
But your response is basically "no, because I won't," which is fine—if I were four years old, I'd probably just grab the toy right out of your hands.🙂

Ethan Allen4 said:Look, just be an honest guy since you're clearly so smart and charming—put Demography Mexico at the very top of the Top Politics section. They earned it with all those posts and views ☕

Prika (thanks for the compliment 😁, and shame on you for questioning my integrity 😳), but I can't make that happen. It’s not about whether I want to or not... I literally don't have the technical tools to do what you're asking. That thread might deserve to be a top topic, but it can't stay pinned at the very top unless we unpin every other major topic too 🤷

And another thing—I can't just move the thread over to the World subforum either. It doesn't belong there, and I'm pretty sure I already told you that.

Kevin Williams56 said:Prika (thanks for the compliment 😁 though I'm pretty insulted you'd question my integrity 😳), look, I can't make that happen—not because I’m refusing, but because I just don't have the technical tools to pull off what you're asking. That topic might be a heavy hitter, sure, but we can't just pin it to the top indefinitely unless we want to unpin every other major thread on the board. 🤷

Also, moving the thread over to the World subforum isn't happening, since it doesn't fit there, which I think I already mentioned.

Between my decades of experience (I'm well over 40 here), I've come to the conclusion that either I'm losing my mind or you're occasionally feeding me some tall tales🙂 regarding how these featured threads actually get picked. One minute you're telling me it’s all automated and out of my hands, and the next you're defending why a controversial thread—in my book, a misplaced one—is sitting there with massive view counts and comment numbers. So, what's the actual metric? If the system is hardcoded to feature anything that hits a certain threshold of posts or views within its first five entries, then fine, you aren't lying when you say you don't control it, unless you plan on "reprogramming" the whole thing. But if that's the case, then this specific thread absolutely qualifies as a top topic based on:

the NUMBER OF REPLIES criterion

It's sitting at #1 for total replies with 6,687, while the runner-up, titled "Share Your Ethical Maps," has 5,666.

Now, looking at the VIEW COUNT criterion:

It's ranked #2 with 332,227 views, trailing right behind "Share Your Ethical Maps" which sits at 631,236 views—feel free to correct me if my math is off.

Under either one of those two logical metrics, this thread should be—or already is—sitting in the top tier, ☕unless the criteria aren't based on data, but on pure politics.

Since I'm not a fan of having a thread about Mexico dominating the main US Politics board, I suggested we move it to the World section as a foreign affairs topic, and that was really the extent of it. Either you didn't catch my drift, you're ignoring the data, or you're acting like a total Soldier trying to play both sides of the fence, which just doesn't work. ☕

I'm more of a technical guy, so I figure everything needs a clear rulebook; maybe you're more of a humanities person where the "criterion" is just "whatever I feel like," but if that's how we're playing, then we don't really have anything left to talk about...

The machine doesn't pick the top trending topics—that’s on the moderators—but it is hardcoded to sort those top threads using the exact same logic as the regular ones.

It’s all about politics first, then quality... raw numbers don't mean squat here.