# Can we have a new rule in GD **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [October 28, 2015, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933 "2015-10-28T03:59:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/1 "2015-10-28T03:59:07Z")
Inspired by this thread, but it’s a regular problem. [A few questions about the Christian heaven](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=773171) It starts okay with a friendly little discussion about the nature of heaven. Some different viewpoints, but everyone played nice. Then later an atheist arrived and the whole tone changed. So, he doesn’t believe in God or heaven, and feels the need to wreck the discussions of those with a different opinion. It seems to me that this sort of behaviour should be forbidden. In a discussion about the nature of heaven, participants should accept, _arguendo_, that heaven is real. To attack the basic premise is Bering A Jerk, and should be subject to moderator action. Anyone wishing to say that heaven does not exist at all should start their own thread for it. Can we have an actual rule for this, please. ---
**Author:** ![Superdude](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/superdude/32/13450_2.png) [@Superdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superdude)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/2 "2015-10-28T04:03:42Z")
Did it get reported? I was in that thread, but haven’t been back to it in a bit. To me, it’s threadshitting, and is worth at least a mod note (in my opinion only). They’re usually pretty good about smacking someone down when they do that. This may have just slipped through the cracks. ---
**Author:** ![voltaire](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voltaire/32/313_2.png) [@voltaire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/voltaire)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/3 "2015-10-28T04:16:56Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#): > > Can we have an actual rule for this, please. You want a rule barring atheists from sharing their views in a thread where the OP closes the first post with: > [@A few questions about the Christian heaven](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-questions-about-the-christian-heaven/735643/1): > > Looking forward to input from Christians and those of any belief or none. ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/4 "2015-10-28T04:23:45Z")
> [@voltaire](#): > > You want a rule barring atheists from sharing their views in a thread where the OP closes the first post with: He wasnt ‘sharing his views’. He was snarking and derailing the conversation. Two seperate things. ---
**Author:** ![voltaire](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voltaire/32/313_2.png) [@voltaire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/voltaire)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/5 "2015-10-28T04:26:50Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > He wasnt ‘sharing his views’. He was snarking and derailing the conversation. Two seperate things. Was he snarking and derailing the conversation in some new way not covered by the rules we already have against those very things? ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/6 "2015-10-28T04:38:40Z")
> [@voltaire](#): > > You want a rule barring atheists from sharing their views in a thread where the OP closes the first post with: Atheists are welcome to share their views … in their own threads. I’m perfectly happy if he wants to start a thread saying God, or Heaven doesn’t exist. What I object to is to him disrupting a discussion about the nature of heaven. See the difference? ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/7 "2015-10-28T04:41:49Z")
> [@voltaire](#): > > Was he snarking and derailing the conversation in some new way not covered by the rules we already have against those very things? Perhaps not. Hence me calling for a new and specific rule about it. ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/8 "2015-10-28T04:45:37Z")
> [@voltaire](#): > > Was he snarking and derailing the conversation in some new way not covered by the rules we already have against those very things? Maybe not. Blame the mods. But his posts werent intended to nor did they offer any conversation. The poster from SD while also an athiest at least was participating in the conversation. He made perfectly fine pit style posts. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/9 "2015-10-28T05:16:39Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#): > > Atheists are welcome to share their views … in their own threads. I’m perfectly happy if he wants to start a thread saying God, or Heaven doesn’t exist. In a thread where the OP says they welcome atheist views? ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/10 "2015-10-28T05:21:17Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > In a thread where the OP says they welcome atheist views? In all fairness, and I’m not offended at the comments of the OP, I can see his frustration… in all fairness… I do have an agenda and I do tend to push it, particularly on any topic of religion or class warfare. I’m not sure if I am apologizing, I’m not refusing to apologize, I am admitting that his criticism is valid. I wasn’t intentionally trying to upset anyone. But my views and position are extreme, I can admit that. ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/11 "2015-10-28T05:32:04Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > In all fairness, and I’m not offended at the comments of the OP, I can see his frustration… in all fairness… I do have an agenda and I do tend to push it, particularly on any topic of religion or class warfare. > > I’m not sure if I am apologizing, I’m not refusing to apologize, I am admitting that his criticism is valid. I wasn’t intentionally trying to upset anyone. But my views and position are extreme, I can admit that. It might just be me but I dont think you are the person he was posting about. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/12 "2015-10-28T05:42:34Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > In a thread where the OP says they welcome atheist views? In the first place, I’m not complaining about one specific thread. I’m talking about the general need for a rule. In the second place, the invitation was to come and discuss concepts of heaven, not for atheists to demand that people answer for Deuteronomy 21:18-21. But you knew that already. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/13 "2015-10-28T05:45:12Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > It might just be me but I dont think you are the person he was posting about. I will neither confirm nor deny that, but out of interest just who do you think I meant? ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/14 "2015-10-28T05:55:38Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#): > > In the first place, I’m not complaining about one specific thread. I’m talking about the general need for a rule. > > In the second place, the invitation was to come and discuss concepts of heaven, not for atheists to demand that people answer for Deuteronomy 21:18-21. > > But you knew that already. Yes, but how can you talk about whether or not god is just, without being able to entertain the idea that he might be unjust? And is not justice at the core of the topic of heaven? ---
**Author:** ![Lucas\_Jackson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lucas_jackson/32/303_2.png) [@Lucas\_Jackson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lucas_Jackson)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/15 "2015-10-28T06:02:53Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#): > > Atheists are welcome to share their views … in their own threads. I’m perfectly happy if he wants to start a thread saying God, or Heaven doesn’t exist. > > What I object to is to him disrupting a discussion about the nature of heaven. > > See the difference? Not really. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/16 "2015-10-28T06:09:54Z")
Perhaps you could link to the post that started the whole thing, to give an idea of what you mean? Threadshitting is already against the rules, so I don’t think you’d need a new one. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 6:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/17 "2015-10-28T06:26:23Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#): > > In the first place, I’m not complaining about one specific thread. I’m talking about the general need for a rule. > > In the second place, the invitation was to come and discuss concepts of heaven, not for atheists to demand that people answer for Deuteronomy 21:18-21. > > But you knew that already. Nah, haven’t read the thread, your position just seemed odd on the face of it. The fact is that GD’s tend to wander. And as **Robert163** post immediately above tends to indicate, people pull broad strands together so threadshitting should only be sanctioned in clear cases. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 6:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/18 "2015-10-28T06:38:24Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > Perhaps you could link to the post that started the whole thing, to give an idea of what you mean? Threadshitting is already against the rules, so I don’t think you’d need a new one. Let me emphasize a point, people. I’m commenting on a general problem that has happened in many threads. I have no intention of pointing the finger at any specific poster, nor of dissecting any specific thread. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/19 "2015-10-28T06:44:59Z")
Then your answer is simply (as others have said) that there is already a rule against threadshitting which is what you seem to be complaining about. I’d need to see examples of behaviour that (a) isn’t threadshitting and (b) is in need of sanction nonetheless, in order to be convinced any new rule is required. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 8:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/20 "2015-10-28T08:50:33Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#): > > Let me emphasize a point, people. I’m commenting on a general problem that has happened in many threads. I have no intention of pointing the finger at any specific poster, nor of dissecting any specific thread. > [@Princhester](#): > > Then your answer is simply (as others have said) that there is already a rule against threadshitting which is what you seem to be complaining about. I’d need to see examples of behaviour that (a) isn’t threadshitting and (b) is in need of sanction nonetheless, in order to be convinced any new rule is required. Exactly. If you look at the thread about Jews being the Chosen People, [the poster who threadshat was moderated for said threadshitting.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18800874&postcount=25) Report the post in question, and if it’s threadshitting it’ll be taken care of. I don’t see the problem. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933.md?page=2)