I thought it had been long tradition here that making joking posts in GQ threads, even ones that don’t add to the thread in any other way, was OK. Sure, it can be annoying sometimes, but sometimes also amusing. Either way, not against the rules.
Why the mod admonishment in this thread?
What’s the story on this? Did the rules change, or are just now being enforced, or what?
IMHO, the problem was that a joke was made before a factual answer was given.
I agree. I’ve made (sometimes funny) jokes in GQ, but only long after the OP has been answered.
What’s wrong with joking before a factual answer is given? It doesn’t prevent factual answers in any way I can imagine, and in fact may in some cases bump the thread to let it be noticed by someone who may provide a factual answer.
Which bumps down other threads that are just as deserving of an answer. What a lame argument. It’s one thing to answer the factual question with humor, it’s quite another to inject MPSIMS like lameness inappropriately.
WAG: it could tempt posters to hijack the thread in favor of jokes instead of real answers. This may/may not lead to the thread being locked.
FYI, I should have mentioned this in the OP: I don’t mean this as a pitting of Samclem or anybody else, it’s just a request for clarification of administration.
Yes, jokes are allowed in GQ. I don’t think that’s ever been a problem.
I don’t have any hard and fast rule about when I jump in to admonish someone–but definitely the later a joke comes in a thread, the more likely it gets a pass. And if the OP has been answered to at least some extent, a joke may also get a pass.
If I feel that someone abuses the use of such a device, then I’ll warn them in some official manner. In the case you cite, that wasn’t an official warning. Maybe you thought it was.
I’m speaking for myself. What other moderators in GQ do is pretty much up to their own style.
Wow, are you married?
I’ve heard before that the rule of thumb is avoid jokes before the question has been answered, which does make sense since if you’re actively watching a thread for an answer, jokes that pop up are an irritation more than anything else.
Since this wasn’t even really a joke - at least, I can’t detect anything resembling a joke, much less anything that gives me the barest hint of amusement - but just (like hajario says) MPSIMS-style lameness, I don’t see the problem with the reprimand. It’s not like it was a warning, just a reminder.
I suspect that if the mods didn’t step in every once in a while for instances like this, it would become a problem and threads would get derailed–particularly if the subject matter is one which lends itself to humor.
Nobody likes people who offer unsolicited advice, but I’m going to do it anyway.
A couple of years ago, we had a problem with the politicization of GQ. Someone would post a question about the causes of the Franco-Prussian War, and the answer would be: “The Prussians didn’t need a cause. They liked to wage war, just like that idiot George W. Bush.” And off to the races we’d go.
The moderator at the time, manhattan, put a stop to it by posting a new sticky in GQ and clearly and consistently admonishing the violators. Some of the “admonishments” took the form of temporary banning, which got everybody’s attention right quick. The problem was solved in about a week. From that time forward, politics in GQ has been much less of a problem.
Today, there seems to be a perception, at least on the part of samclem, that we have a problem with the MPSIMS-ification of GQ. I agree with this perception.
At the moment in GQ, we have:
A question about underpromotion in chess, which has wandered off into an IMHO discussion of possible rule changes having nothing to do with underpromotion.
A question on seismic energy, wandering off into a GD about every conceivable alternative energy source.
A question about microwave sensors, which has become a succession of jokes.
Should we care? Well, it isn’t an issue on the scale of Sudanese genocide. And you can always say, if you don’t like the offending threads, don’t read them. But then why have separate forums? If there’s a GQ thread about a topic on which I have specialized knowledge, I like to read it and see if I have anything to contribute. When half the threads are rambling discussions or successions of jokes, it takes a lot more time to do that.
Anyway, if the mods want to stop this, they should post a new sticky explaining the problem and laying out new guidelines (not hard-and-fast rules, but guidelines), and then consistently enforce them. This sporadic “because I feel like it” enforcement is only going to cause angst and Pit Proliferation.
The moderators of each forum are currently working on cleaning up the stickies and making them easier to read/use/understand. You suggestion is very good and I think you’ll see such a stickie in the very near future.
As to trying to consistently enforce the guidelines, its a problem. I don’t work on Sunday and can sit here on the boards for 12 hours. I’m more likely to catch a new thread in GQ and notice it getting off track soonest. On Monday, I’m off to work by 7am and can’t access the board until after 7pm. By the time I get on, there are numerous threads which have been sidetracked but are now 20 posts long. It’s not always feasible to step into each thread at the 20 post level and admonish the poster in post #3 about their hijack/joke/etc, much less read each thread completely in a timely manner. Wish it were.
Thanks for the suggestion which we’re working on.
I can’t speak for every mod decision on the subject, but I know that we want to keep the forums separate. If you want to make a lot of jokes, or have a joke thread, there are more appropriate places to do it. If everyone jumps into a GQ thread just to make one-liners, the point of the forum is gone. Occasional, appropriate jokes are fine in my opinion if they increase everyone’s enjoyment; I simply don’t want to open a GQ thread with 8 replies and find that they’re ALL “I don’t know the answer, but I’m going to throw out a catchphrase to get a laugh!” posts.
It’s highly contextual. Remember that a moderator may step in before rules are literally broken to provide guidance. Too many jokes can certainly be taken as hijacking the thread (as a thread with all joke replies will eventually get closed or moved), so we don’t want you all to get to that point.
In my opinion, there can’t be a hard and fast rule in a situation like this without being too draconian (all jokes banned / make sure your joke adheres to a long list of guidelines) or too lenient (anything allowed in every forum). If we feel you’re crossing the line, we’ll let you know; don’t expect a formal warning. If determining which post needs to be in which forum becomes problematic for everyone, I’m all for a sticky on the subject.
Did you ever have a coworker or friend give you a great setup line? Imagine waiting 20 or 30 minutes after the moment has passed before responding with your zinger.
Timing is everything - sometimes the joke has to come right after the OP.
As of a couple of months ago, no. I don’t get it.
You’re that person in the office who always laughs at their own jokes while everyone else rolls their eyes at each other, right?
I have sympathy for that. I’ve done it myself. Just to show you that we aren’t robots, I might overlook a world-class one-liner where I might NOT appreciate someone putting in a lame-ass comment/joke.
I think, as always, we should look to our Perfect Master for the example in supplying information. You need the right balance of factual information and humor, with just a dash of insult. If you get off-balance too far one way or the other, this place wouldn’t have anything to set itself apart.
I’m not going to respondify that with a dig.
Might that have anything to do with why you’re no longer married? 