Thanks for everyone's input on the off-topic sidebar I took, namely that of renaming "Starters".  Basically, this is my (unscientific) take on the responses with my comments interspersed.

Most feel that we need a "General" section, that the "Starters" is not always appropriate and that "Scripts" is not always a good fit as an alternative.  Most also feel that we don't need/want more (or too many) forums.

I question the intent of "Starters" and "Scripts".  This is after all, a scripting forum so most topics could fall under "Scripts" but the by-line confuses.  Should there then be a script posted with every new thread?  Then there's "Starters". What sets them apart? I see long-timers post stuff that's of starters calibre and starters post stuff that's pretty advanced.  Once again, the by-line confuses.  That was why
I thought that to rename "Starters" would be the simplest but the idea did not carry.

The second idea (NT DOC's) was to keep "Starters" and to add a "General" forum to keep non-relevant topics out of the other forums.  Like the idea of the bell on the cat, it is fine but who will moderate it?

Jack,
All the forums are, by their nature, "discussion" forums, so I'd have to go with NT DOC's suggestion for name and by-line.

MCA,
I'm not to clear on our position.  In one breath, you say "We find the suggestions for updating forum description page of NTDOC great", which I infer as yes on the "General" forum, as that is the only real change from the existing page.  In the next breath, you say "We don't find it necessary to create again a new forum".  If that is the case then what change of NT DOC's do you find "great"?

If we have consensus, then all we need is a moderator or two and of course, Henri's blessing.
_________________________
Give a man a fish and he will be back for more. Slap him with a fish and he will go away forever.