# Analogies Banned in GD - Part II **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [November 21, 2014, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261 "2014-11-21T16:29:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/1 "2014-11-21T16:29:26Z")
This is not a thread about SSM. I respectfully request any poster to refrain from expressing an opinion on the subject in this thread, and to do so if necessary in GD. I would request, if possible, to limit discussion in this thread only to questions of moderation. I asked the following in a now-locked thread - [QUOTE] [ul][li]Is it now the job of the mods to decide what arguments are wrong, and may therefore not be repeated? [/li][li]What are the standards under which it will be decided what arguments are right and what are wrong? [/li][li]If the moderation staff cannot or prefers not to clarify the standards, should Dopers who see an incorrect and repeated argument simply report it, as we are asked to do for other violations of standards?[/ul] [/li][/QUOTE] Again - _please_ - **this is not a discussion of the merits or otherwise of any specific analogy.** Thanks in advance for any useful response. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/2 "2014-11-21T17:05:36Z")
I wrote in the locked thread that I think this is a very bad idea. For some context, here’s a quote from the locked thread from **TubaDiva** : > [@Analogies banned in GD](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd/705192/27): > > I dunno, maybe it’s not such a bad idea to ask people to bring their A-game to Great Debates. > > Debate is a time-honored thing. I mean real debate, not slapping other people with half-truths or outright lies or stuff you pull out of your a–. I mean your assumptions. I’d like to think we hold people to a higher standard, that you go into the forum ready to discuss and even argue ideas and beliefs with a sincere desire to really tackle these issues and not just jerk other people around with low-rate junk. > > Or are we asking too much? Hell yes, you’re asking too much, but mainly from the moderators. Think it through. The main result of attempting this will be to stifle GD and probably cause the bias and partisanship of the moderators to generate even more complaints than it already does. ETA: Was going to write more, but I have to dash. I’ll write more soon. ---
**Author:** ![CannyDan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cannydan/32/548_2.png) [@CannyDan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CannyDan)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/3 "2014-11-21T17:26:20Z")
I too think this is a bad idea. I was writing out my reasoning in Word, but then saw the thread was closed. I didn’t think my scribblings were worthy of creating a new thread, so I deleted them. Now I’m sorry I didn’t keep a copy. At any rate, short version, I far prefer the present system wherein posters making flawed (even ‘invalid’) arguments are refuted by other posters and suffer just deserts in the “shovel – hole” system. Even annoyingly persistent and repetitious flawed reasoning (and I’ve seen plenty in GD!) is better than having moderation of the validity or the effort level (“A game”) of interlocutors’ arguments and analogies. ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/4 "2014-11-21T17:46:12Z")
I think you’re focusing on the wrong thing. It’s not a “ban” on flawed or incorrect arguments. It’s limiting flawed argument **methodologies**. If you want to make a completely idiotic nonsensical argument, go for it. That shouldn’t be limited by moderators. But if you ignore responses and critiques of your argument and simply repeat the same thing over and over, that adds nothing to the discussion. I’m fine with moderators trying to keep things on track in that situation. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/5 "2014-11-21T18:11:55Z")
> [@TroutMan](#): > > But if you ignore responses and critiques of your argument and simply repeat the same thing over and over, that adds nothing to the discussion. And therein lies the problem. Who—with consistent fairness and without partisanship or bias—is to judge whether an argument has been duly rebutted, and whether the poster’s pertinacious style is truly impeding the progress of the debate or on the contrary bravely holding fast in the face of invalid counter-argument? I still hold that the moderators should not act on that level. There are already sufficient complaints—not all lacking validity—about moderator bias. This would take that to a whole new level. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/6 "2014-11-21T18:13:27Z")
How do you tell the difference between repeating the same stupid, irrelevant, flawed analogy without addressing the critiques and trolling? ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/7 "2014-11-21T18:25:18Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > And therein lies the problem. Who—with consistent fairness and without partisanship or bias—is to judge whether an argument has been duly rebutted, and whether the poster’s pertinacious style is truly impeding the progress of the debate or on the contrary bravely holding fast in the face of invalid counter-argument? It’s a fair point, but the same could be said for anything the moderators do. I think most posters and pretty much all the mods can do a decent job of identifying when someone is no longer arguing in good faith. I’ll take the few mistakes versus threads that devolve into nothing more than “Is so!”, “Is not!” I think a useful discussion can be had around if we want the mods to limit unfair argument methods that contribute nothing to the discussion. But the OP was about banning wrong arguments, which isn’t really a problem here. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/8 "2014-11-21T18:27:38Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > How do you tell the difference between repeating the same stupid, irrelevant, flawed analogy without addressing the critiques and trolling? That question doesn’t make sense. ---
**Author:** ![TubaDiva](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tubadiva/32/507_2.png) [@TubaDiva](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TubaDiva)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/9 "2014-11-21T18:33:51Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > How do you tell the difference between repeating the same stupid, irrelevant, flawed analogy without addressing the critiques and trolling? And that’s the thing right there, isn’t it? First off, I strenuously protest the title of this thread. Analogies are not banned in GD or anywhere else, so stop that crap right now. Surely if someone has argued in bad faith – gone on for pages and pages and not addressed any critiques, not rebutted anything, just keeps throwing the same thing up over and over – that’s not debate, that’s a whole 'nother thing altogether and something should have been said. In saying that I’m not making any accusations here towards anyone in any direction. I note that I’m not a GD moderator neither. The people that are have a tough job that makes herding cats look like a walk in the spring rain. I’d like to see them have better stuff to moderate. I believe most of our Dopers are highly capable of that betterment. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/10 "2014-11-21T18:38:47Z")
> [@TubaDiva](#): > > In saying that I’m not making any accusations here towards anyone in any direction. I note that I’m not a GD moderator neither. The people that are have a tough job that makes herding cats look like a walk in the spring rain. I’d like to see them have better stuff to moderate… I certainly agree with the sentiment behind this statement. However, there is a real limit to the extent to which moderators can take action to improve the quality of a thread. I firmly believe your suggestion goes to far into trying to micromanage the posters, and furthermore would be an undo burden on the moderators. Simply stated, it would be asking moderators to get involved in every thread to an unreasonable extent, barring adding A LOT more moderators to GD. > [@](#): > > I believe most of our Dopers are highly capable of that betterment. You might be a more optimistic person than I am. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/11 "2014-11-21T18:52:12Z")
> [@TubaDiva](#): > > Surely if someone has argued in bad faith – gone on for pages and pages and not addressed any critiques, not rebutted anything, just keeps throwing the same thing up over and over – that’s not debate, that’s a whole 'nother thing altogether and something should have been said. That’s just a restatement of the problem - is it the job of the mods to decide when critiques have been adequately addressed and when they have not? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/12 "2014-11-21T18:56:19Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > That’s just a restatement of the problem - is it the job of the mods to decide when critiques have been adequately addressed and when they have not? > > Regards, > Shodan For extreme cases – when something has been going on and on for a while, like the Holocaust denial stuff with **Gack** – the answer seems to be yes. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/13 "2014-11-21T19:07:43Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > And therein lies the problem. Who—with consistent fairness and without partisanship or bias—is to judge whether an argument has been duly rebutted, and whether the poster’s pertinacious style is truly impeding the progress of the debate or on the contrary bravely holding fast in the face of invalid counter-argument? Moderators are, that’s their job. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/14 "2014-11-21T19:09:35Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > Moderators are, that’s their job. This is not a specific task presented as being among GD moderator duties, but has [arisen from issues](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=741392) regarding moderation in [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=740941). Please point to somewhere in the GD rules where it says sticking with a supposedly rebutted argument is in itself a rules violation. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/15 "2014-11-21T19:12:30Z")
Isn’t it just “bad” analogies being banned? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/16 "2014-11-21T19:34:32Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > Isn’t it just “bad” analogies being banned? NOBODY IS BANNING ANALOGIES. Jesus, this is like harvesting space-kelp with a bendy straw. ---
**Author:** ![Cicero](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cicero/32/3594_2.png) [@Cicero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cicero)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/17 "2014-11-21T19:36:53Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > How do you tell the difference between repeating the same stupid, irrelevant, flawed analogy without addressing the critiques and trolling? Has Diogenes the Cynic been allowed back? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/18 "2014-11-21T19:43:59Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > NOBODY IS BANNING ANALOGIES. **Jonathan Chance** BANNED AN ANALOGY BECAUSE HE THOUGHT IT WAS BAD AND HAD BEEN REFUTED. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER IT SHOULD BE POLICY TO BAN ANALOGIES IF THEY ARE BAD AND HAVE BEEN REFUTED. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![CannyDan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cannydan/32/548_2.png) [@CannyDan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CannyDan)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/19 "2014-11-21T19:54:00Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > …there is a real limit to the extent to which moderators can take action to improve the quality of a thread… This. However laudable the desire to improve the quality of threads, in GD or elsewhere, I don’t think either the posters or the moderators really want moderation of content. Make a stupid argument/analogy once and you’ll be refuted. (_I know, I’ve made my share of stupid arguments._) Make the same one again and you’ll be laughed at. (_I may have done so a time or two. 😉_) Keep on making it and you’ll be ignored. At least, you’ll be ignored by everybody who is actually debating. People engaging in empty snark or making their own non-contributions will do as they do. Usually by this point the real debate has moved on or been settled. If I’m entertained by the repeated flogging of the deceased equine, I’ll keep reading. Otherwise, I’ll send my attention elsewhere. The thread will live or die. All will be right with the world. What I _won’t_ have to do is constantly run to ATMB to see rules lawyering precipitated by moderation of somebody’s analogy in that thread. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2014, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261/20 "2014-11-21T20:03:33Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > **Jonathan Chance** BANNED AN ANALOGY BECAUSE HE THOUGHT IT WAS BAD AND HAD BEEN REFUTED. > > THE QUESTION IS WHETHER IT SHOULD BE POLICY TO BAN ANALOGIES IF THEY ARE BAD AND HAVE BEEN REFUTED. Wrong. The analogy was banned because –oh shit, I just remembered something– > [@](#): > > Again - please - this is not a discussion of the merits or otherwise of any specific analogy. Who said that? Anyway, you’re wrong. Analogies are banned only in the sense that words are banned. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/analogies-banned-in-gd-part-ii/705261.md?page=2)