samclem, I would assume that what I posted earlier (which you quoted) is correct and the moderator did respond to me after all. Am I right that the inaccurate title was never changed or am I wrong about that also?
No, the “Jesus Horses” thread title was never changed, not that I can see.
My only point was that you emailed a moderator(who responded) and he/she declined to change it.
Can you take your answer one step further, and tell us why one misleading title was apparently acceptable to the mods, whilst another was grounds for a warning of trolling, leading up to a suspension? Thanks.
For that, you’d have to ask each of the mods involved in the two threads.
See, now, I asked you, as the Staff member that is currently posting in this thread. Are you saying you can’t, or won’t, answer? Fine. Who was the mod that declined to change the “Jesus Horses” thread title?
Sometimes the mod hive mind breaks down. When that happens, each nodule of the MHM ends up having to make decisions for itself, and sometimes different MHMNs decide similar issues differently. In such cases, appealing to the MHMSC is the best option.
Daniel
I would answer your question, but don’t know who the mod was. You can ask Zoe, but she forgot that the mod even responded to her.
The original thread is in the BBQ Pit. I have no idea if that’s where it started out.
Again, I don’t have a dog(or horse) in this fight.
Sam–the message I’m getting is that there’s no clear guideline for you guys on this issue. Tuba was Zoe’s second attempt to get the title changed and her reaction was
which isn’t in sync with Lynn’s “…the information in your title is inaccurate. This sort of inflammatory posting is trolling. DON’T do it again”
These two stances seen in direct opposition.
Currently lissener has a Pit Thread entitled “Bush White House to Obamas: Maybe you can find a park bench to sleep on?”
His first line is
Before this current debacle, I’d have thought lissener’s title was absolutely fine–inaccurate but designed to catch the viewer’s eye and related enough to the topic that it’s not even remotely trolling.
How is lissener’s thread any different from Euth’s–even down to the acknowledgment that the thread title isn’t 100% accurate.
Could you clarify your understanding of this contradiction?
I’m not sure just how you would write such a clear guideline, but, yes, it would be my understanding that it’s left up to the individual moderator.
Again, without a hard and fast written rule(which I would be against), it is probably left up to the individual moderator’s discretion.
Fenris’s Rule:
“Unless the thread title is unrelated to the subject of the post, it’s fine. Hyperbole, approximate quotes, 'reductio ad absurdum” are all fine. “Come see the fluffy bunnies” title with a “Clinton is a RAPIST!” subject would not be. If you think the thread title is a lie, feel free to discuss it with the poster in the thread"
But then how do we know what’s OK to post? This isn’t a “Don’t be a jerk” issue. None of the three thread titles in question (Lissener’s, the one Zoe was concerned about and Euth’s) may all be misleading, but all three relate to the subject inside the post and none are “Jerk-ish”. Were I an Admin (and we can all breathe a sigh of relief that I’m not 
) I’d say “All three are fine.”
Frankly, if the thread title is dishonest, the posters in the thread will deal with it-mostly by eating the poster alive. There doesn’t need to be a rule about “misleading” thread titles, only blatant misrepresentation of thread content. (IMO of course)
And…we have our answer. It depends on whose ox is being gored. Christians, Southerners, Bush, all fair targets, PP not so much.
Exactly! But only if Christians are fundamentalists or liberals. Steer clear of the middle ground. White trash is okay. Arabs are okay as long as we don’t refer to their religion. What did we decide about Jews? Biblical Jews are fair game, right? Nix on Holocaust Jews, but okay on New York Jews?
Southerners (the white ones by default) are stupid – that goes without saying. So if someone lies in a thread title and makes Southerners look even dumber than they naturally are, they just have to suck it up. That was the understanding that I got from Tuba Diva’spost. She worded it very nicely. It would have taken her less time to change the title.
So I never got an explanation, only a polite response that told me what I already knew.
But I remember well that I was told who would take care of the problem – and that was Tuba Diva.
I don’t think I’ve bothered to report an inaccurate or misleading title since that one.
Let’s see if I’ve got this right. Whether or not you get suspended or banned for a thread title depends on which mod is on duty at that time? You, the poster, just take pot luck?
You misspelled pot fuck.
You’ve got that wrong. Whether or not you get warned for trolling because of a thread title depends on which mod is on duty at that time.
It also seems to depend on the mod having a particular interest in the subject of that thread and/or the mod feeling the need to flex a bit of virtual muscle (aka dickwave).
Not opening a different thread to tell the mod to fuck off is what gets you suspended or banned. Sometimes.
It’s been a few days now – Any updates from the mods/admin here?
Apparently, given this
and the fact that samclem is posting to this thread, the discussion must be over. I am not aware if the resolution is posted anywhere, or if it will be. Maybe they just haven’t gotten around to it.
On preview, maybe this -
is the resolution.
Or maybe samclem didn’t know about the rule against posting during ongoing discussions, or the rule’s been changed, or they’re waiting for Euthanasiast to serve out his suspension, or something.
Who knows? I’m not psychic. 
Regards,
Shodan
Euthanasiast’s suspension is due to end tomorrow, but it will be extended indefinitely while they decide if he should have been suspended or not.
Or maybe the rule is more complex than you think it is. As I suggested earlier, maybe it’s not even a true “rule,” but more of a preference. If you’re expecting me to lay out the details of the “rule” so that you can rules-lawyer it, well, stop.
That ended some time ago. Straight Dope Message Board - Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.
The real answer: It’s taking longer than we thought. Someone will make an announcement as soon as we have something to announce.
Actually it ended early this morning.
There is so much that I want to say, but I’d have to open up another thread to do it, and even then what I’d say would almost certainly get me banned. I think it best that I self impose an extension to my suspension.
Thank you, to those who made all of the arguments that I couldn’t have during my ‘absence’.