Since I no longer develop software for a living, Chatter is about the only reason I still come back.

By the way, I missed a lot of this thread. Did someone imply that Grover is Kevin G? For my 2 cents (2.02 cents US), I'd say, that goes waaaayyy beyond unlikely and right into fantasy. Kevin says what he thinks as Kevin. Sometimes that gets him flack, but his skin is thick enough. This is not Kevin's way. Uh, uh!

Whatever evidence anybody thinks there is, has been fooled. And no, it's not me either.


>>>>>There are many sites out there that do not tolerate chatter sections, but I find the UT chatter section something I look forward to reading once in a while.
>>>>
>>>>In those sites that you are referring to, do you get the perception that they are better off without a Chatter allowed content, in reference to the good running of the site?
>>>
>>>No better. There is banning happening on all those sites. It think it is a regular occurance. Some sites use "monitors", people have proven their reliabilty and can monitor a section of the site and "red flag" unwelcomed posters and bring it to the attention of the webmaster who make the final decision. But most of them do not have a chatter section, in order to eliminate some of the "noise" you get here. But some of that noise is sometimes a "welcome' change to the technical aspect of the subjects. Although the interesting element here at UT a good portion of the call for banning is caused in some ways by MVP (so you mentionned) , and your site seems to attract a good bunch of them, more than others anyways. Corrolation between MVPs and banning maybe.
>>
>>Interesting viewpoint. I wonder what the ratio of technical to chatter posts is on a regular basis? Are there more posts in chatter? Does chatter attract any members who would not visit the site without it? Does it turn away more members than it attracts? If chatter were to disappear, would the usage go down? If so, would it be temporary and would no chatter actually bring back or bring in new members down the road eventually? Is a completely different Chatter forum separate from the UT but available from the UT via a link on the task bar a better option? Perhaps leaving the site to get to chatter would separate it from those who prefer not to see it and keep it from new members unless they choose to visit it?
>
>Should be mentioned that a lot of chatter has a way of happening as "thread drift". There is the possibility that without the outlet of a chatter section there is really no place for that to properly be redirected.
>
>With absolutely no chatter you get no community - i.e. no sense of who the other posters are. ( perhaps that's a good thing, in some cases, but I feel it would be my loss to not know some of the people here ) StackOverflow is an example of a technically extremely worthwhile place, but not someplace I hang out - just someplace I go for specific questions and answers. It has it's place, but I can go for weeks without checking it.
>
>I have a big problem with the degree to which chatter has been taken over by invective and personal drama. But everyone has their own tastes in these things, and I don't know how one adjusts that, except by personally trying to restrain the impulse to participate or react and to just ignore postings and posters you would ignore in real life.