Won’t somebody think of the poor dead horses?
And, frankly, it seems pretty disingenuous. Asking a question that the average person who’s spent any time here would KNOW would lead to a myriad of answers and thinking it would be the same as a narrow question of that nature (ProTip: “Do some Christians think Jesus isn’t love?” is quite different from “What’s the cloth-covered card that Catholic priests put on top of the chalice called?”) is kind of odd.
Bloody Jesus, not_alice, give it a rest already!
No one cares about this but you. I don’t know why Colibri is even still paying attention to you on this.
not_alice, thank you for the links. At least now I can see the original “Jesus loves you” comment.
Let me attempt to clarify this point. You posted a thread in GQ that Colibri determined belongs in GD. You requested that the thread be returned to GQ or that it be closed. Colibri’s comment regarding the closure was that it made no sense to close the thread if you were just going to open a new thread in GQ asking the same question, which would again be moved to GD. That was the point of the “negotiation” - simply to keep you from repeating the process and ending up in the same place - your question in GD.
Of course he could have moderated that differently. He could have closed your thread, with perhaps a comment that if you opened a duplicate in GQ you would be given a Warning. But that might come off a bit heavy-handed, so instead he simply asked if you were done with the question, or if you were still trying to get answers. Just saving work and all that.
Now that you mention it, what is that thing called?
It was out of place in the thread where it first appeared (although I was just going to let it go). The thread was asking for factoids that sound right only for a moment, then are self-evidently nonsense.
It just isn’t an example of something that appears correct, then pulls the rug from under your feet as soon as you try to understand it. It’s either nonsense from the start (to those who don’t believe it), or plausible to those that do. There’s no punch.
It’s called a pall, or a chalice pall, to differentiate it from the pall that covers a casket in funeral masses.
Thanks jayjay, that would’ve really bugged me every week if no one had answered.
Right. A thread like that in GQ would require frequent attention to make sure it wasn’t turning into a debate; better to just move it and allow it to take its course.
Yes. Of course it is perfectly possible to obtain factual information in GD; not_alice is not compelled to participate in the debate himself. However, he has been trying to turn several successive ATMB threads into a debate on this subject or related points. A demand to close the thread now that he has one available in the correct forum really seems nothing more than an attempt to be contrary.
Of course it carries a myriad of answers. Just like many questions in GQ I suppose. Is GQ limited to only multiple choice type questions?
The answers can be given without debate - if people want to debate, they should go to GD. I agree with that.
Since it is so easy to say “many Christian’s core belief is ‘Jesus is love’”, I don’t expect that the myriad of possible alternative core beliefs are much more complicated.
And also, the possible answers, without debate to the question “Is it true that for many the core belief is “Jesus is Love” and for many it is not “Jesus is love””? are yes, no, and maybe so. Beyond that I agree it is GD territory, but I tried to phrase the question to narrow the answers in that fashion.
Thanks for understanding.
Or he could have taken his ego out of it and not treated my thread the way he did.
The OP was short and to the point that it was not meant for GD, for whatever reason he conjured, already having been steamed by his interactions with me, which led to the question in the first place, recall, it was merely to get a sense if what he stated as fact earlier was in fact true, not to debate it.
In my experience - which is limited in the scale of things, I have never seen a request to close a thread be challenged, and especially not subject to negotiation.
I also have never given any indication that I would duplicate a thread - I simply asked a question, it landed in the wrong forum, at the whim of an already-peeved moderator, and then he insinuated I want a debate on the topic when I don’t, and when I say I would rather have no answer than a debate, he doesn’t believe me anyway.
So I ask the regulars and long-timers - have you ever seen such a thread request, especially so early in the thread - be treated that way? Maybe it happens, I am open to that possibility, but I have never seen it myself.
It is not a debate, it is merely a series of questions regarding behavior and dodging straightforward questions. Marley23’s answer to my original question was fine, but that would have never happened had I not opened a new thread because you capriciously closed the prior one.
And if you had let his answer stand instead of trying to explain about the core beliefs of some Christians, and insinuating that I as a non-Christian should know that those are not parallel to story themes from the Bible - is just bizarre and calls out for a clarification. I don’t know if “Jesus is love” or similar statements appear in the Bible anymore than I know if the phrase (from the original thread) “Adam ate an apple” appears in it. I don’t qualitatively know the difference because I am not Christian.
This string of questions are coming from me, sure, but they are about you in your capacity as moderator,Colibri. If the number of them seems high, let’s share credit where due 
I’ve explained my reasoning. I am not responding further unless some additional issue not already covered comes up.
Very mysterious - so I guess by shuffling threads, closing threads, etc, you have avoided answering all of the questions put to you, while doing your best to seem as though you did. I don’t know why that is, but I agree, let’s put it to rest right here. Well played!
You got the answer you were looking for, and the thread then got moved to GD. You don’t want it there, so you want the thread closed.
Do I have it right? If so, then why close the thread because you want it to be closed? If you don’t like the debate, don’t read the thread.
I don’t know why you find this so hard to figure out.
srzss05 has explained the current situation. Nothing compels not_alice to return to that thread and other posters appear to be entertaining themselves with the discussion.
I have, indeed, closed a couple of threads at the request of the OP when the threads had turned into trainwrecks or bitter feuds, having long since lost the point of the OP. I do not recall having closed a thread in which the participants were behaving themselves simply because the OP was dissatisfied with the direction the thread had taken.
No, not right at all. It was moved before any answers were allowed to be given.
Perhaps indeed you don’t know why.
You guys are really working hard to rewrite recent history, huh?
No, srzss05 does not have the situation described properly, see previous post.
And that people are behaving sort of belies the threat that Colibir saw, and the rest of the actual moderators of GD appeared to concur with, each of whom I asked via PM to close the thread, that the thread was a sure GD question - no one could possibly behave without namecalling when Jesus is the topic :rolleyes:
So, now that the OPPOSITE of your fears has been realized, and you have said so yourself, can you at least move it back to GQ and give it a fair shake like I asked earlier, and like I clearly expressed in the OP?
So Colibri actually told you in a PM that “no one could possibly behave without namecalling when Jesus is the topic”? Color me somewhat skeptical.
Here’s the thing…you don’t own a thread you start. You can request that people replying to your OP act in a certain way. You can request that certain subjects related to the OP not be brought up. But nobody has to listen to you. As long as the thread remains mostly on-topic, people are free to reply in ways and on side topics that they wish. And that will determine how the thread goes. The OP, standing athwart the tide and screaming “STOP!”, has no say. Once you release that thread into the Doper wilderness, it’s out of your hands.
And the simple fact is that some topics are going to belong naturally in certain forums. Questions about religion that actually touch on theology belong in GD. Questions about religion that merely touch on ritual and/or terminology belong in GQ. Your OP touched on theology. If you seriously just wanted a yes or no answer to the question of whether some Christians don’t see Jesus as love, you were being oddly obtuse in not recognizing that a yes or no answer wasn’t that simple to attain.