# 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:** 4
**Author:** ![Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slow_moving_vehicle/32/291_2.png) [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slow_Moving_Vehicle)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/61 "2015-10-29T04:36:32Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > Or, perhaps, if people want a discussion that is not going to disagree with the christian narrative, they could post the thread in some other section besides great debate. Dude, you were threadshitting. Or hijacking, at the very least. I’m sure you were just expressing your views, but you showed your ass in that thread. Or so it seemed to me. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/62 "2015-10-29T04:42:17Z")
> [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](#): > > Dude, you were threadshitting. Or hijacking, at the very least. Sorry, but I think you showed your ass in that thread. Yeah And lots of people bend the rules and learn the ways you can do that on SDMB. Lots of people have their pet topics and agendas. I’m not saying I’m right. I’m not saying I can’t improve. I’m not saying I shouldn’t improve. I’m admitting that I could act better but I will also defend myself by saying I was in Great Debates. Threads get taken on a tangent there quite frequently. ---
**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 29, 2015, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/63 "2015-10-29T04:54:59Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > I’m not saying I’m right. I’m not saying I can’t improve. I’m not saying I shouldn’t improve. I’m admitting that I could act better but I will also defend myself by saying I was in Great Debates. Threads get taken on a tangent there quite frequently. That’s a lot of words to say absolutely nothing. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/64 "2015-10-29T04:59:55Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > That’s a lot of words to say absolutely nothing. Oh, really? Aren’t you the guy who is allways defending people against being (mis)labeled as being a racist? What happened to your objectivity? At least I’m being honest about my motives and my actions. I can’t say the same for the people you regularly defend. I will make an apology now, for being critical of **John Mace** , in ATMB. If I could think of a more polite way to phrase my response, I would. But my basic comments, I am going to let them stand, unless corrected by a mod. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/65 "2015-10-29T05:43:29Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > I’m not saying I’m right. I’m not saying I can’t improve. I’m not saying I shouldn’t improve. I’m admitting that I could act better but I will also defend myself by saying I was in Great Debates. Threads get taken on a tangent there quite frequently. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > That’s a lot of words to say absolutely nothing. Yeah that was unfair John. Robert is leaving the door open to better posting, but also claiming that his behavior wasn’t out of the ordinary in GD. Fair enough. Um, Robert? I looked over the thread. I’ve seen a lot worse. But yeah, upping your game would be good for all of us: you posted some howlers. It happens. No worries: just saying. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/66 "2015-10-29T05:48:39Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > Yeah that was unfair John. Robert is leaving the door open to better posting, but also claiming that his behavior wasn’t out of the ordinary in GD. Fair enough. > > Um, Robert? I looked over the thread. I’ve seen a lot worse. But yeah, upping your game would be good for all of us: you posted some howlers. It happens. No worries: just saying. Thanks Next time perhaps I will start my own thread if I want to focus my criticism on a tangent connected too but off topic (directly) from the thread. I am willing to give it a try. Personally, I never complain when someone takes a tangent on a thread in a thread that I have started, but, going off topic seems to be against board etiquette. No to argue with anyone, I think a thread should go where it wants, but, I’ll try starting my own thread next time… ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/67 "2015-10-29T05:53:59Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > . . . Threads get taken on a tangent there quite frequently. I think that’s the key, and works within the existing rules. When a digression becomes too irritating, report it to a mod and ask if we can get re-railed or mainstreamed again. Threadshitting is really bad behavior. There are ways to “show the flag” without trying to stop the conversation. It’s threadshitting to post, “Since there is no Heaven, this is a pointless discussion.” It’s showing the flag to say, “Well, since there is no Heaven, this is a pointless discussion. However, Thomas Aquinas said this, and Saint Augustine said that, and Pope Leopold once said something else.” It’s getting in the zap…but then transcending it and working within the hypothetical. It’s a little threadshitty, but it also adds to the actual intended discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 6:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/68 "2015-10-29T06:38:53Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > Thanks > > Next time perhaps I will start my own thread if I want to focus my criticism on a tangent connected too but off topic (directly) from the thread. I am willing to give it a try. Personally, I never complain when someone takes a tangent on a thread in a thread that I have started, but, going off topic seems to be against board etiquette. No to argue with anyone, I think a thread should go where it wants, but, I’ll try starting my own thread next time… To tell you the truth, I hijack all the time. My approach is to label it like this: [hijack]On the other hand, what about those Mets?[/hijack] Meaning, I try to have some empathy for the topic in the OP. Also, I feel a little freer on page 3 or 4 than I do on page 1. We rarely settle anything here after all: the best we can do is to elucidate the main lines of argument. At the end of the day, this is a matter of calibration: people can get annoyed with alleged duplicate threads as well. I guess the _general_ guideline I’d give is to post for those who may disagree with you, rather than simply trying to express yourself. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/69 "2015-10-29T06:40:53Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > I think that’s the key, and works within the existing rules. When a digression becomes too irritating, report it to a mod and ask if we can get re-railed or mainstreamed again. > > Threadshitting is really bad behavior. There are ways to “show the flag” without trying to stop the conversation. > > It’s threadshitting to post, “Since there is no Heaven, this is a pointless discussion.” > > It’s showing the flag to say, “Well, since there is no Heaven, this is a pointless discussion. However, Thomas Aquinas said this, and Saint Augustine said that, and Pope Leopold once said something else.” It’s getting in the zap…but then transcending it and working within the hypothetical. It’s a little threadshitty, but it also adds to the actual intended discussion. Yeah, good point, that would be a better way to a handle it. In keeping with new efforts I started my own [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18813829&posted=1#post18813829) from that topic. ---
**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 29, 2015, 9:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/70 "2015-10-29T09:44:19Z")
> [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](#): > > If you were able to sanction atheists from participating in threads about religion, Once again, I’m not against their participationof atheists. They are welcome to participate as long as they keep it on topic. > [@](#): > > you’d cut down on threadshitting, yes. But you’d also lose some intelligent commentary and perspective. The rule would only cover threadshitting, > [@](#): > > look at the thread you cited as inspiring your OP, where Trinopus, who’s an atheist, posted several intelligent comments about Thomas Aquinas. Can you honestly say he didn’t add to the conversation? Of course he did. He didn’t threadshit, and the proposed rule wouldn’t affect him. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 9:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/71 "2015-10-29T09:54:17Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#): > > The rule would only cover threadshitting Uhh, then… ---
**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 29, 2015, 10:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/72 "2015-10-29T10:16:38Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > They were (a) brainwashed in supernatural dreck from birth (b) likely to be completely disavowed by society if they expressed non-religious views. > > I’m not smarter but I’ve been raised in a more intellectually free environment. > > In any event, the key point is that we at least have evidence that terrorists and explosives and so on exist. All powerful sky pixies that care deeply if I masturbate? Not so much. Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps you too have been brainwashed by dreck? - religion is terrorists and explosions - God cares if you masturbate I think you are just copying what other people have told you, and you’ve never really thought it through for yourself. It certainly isn’t realistic. Plus, of course tghe fact that atheism isd your dogma, and you will disavow those who express non-atheistic views. Intellectually free my arse. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/73 "2015-10-29T11:45:42Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > [hijack]On the other hand, what about those Mets?[/hijack] Yeah, how 'bout them? Damn Cub-killers. Anyway, as promised I shared this out with my fellow moderators. Unsurprisingly - to me, at least - there’s no feeling that a new rule is required. There was a sentiment that - as in most cases - that some of the cited posts could be sanctionable for threadshitting and derailing debate. Now the first one can be a mess. Ruling against a poster for threadshitting is a near impossible task to do to most people’s satisfaction as one person’s poop is another person’s well-reasoned argument. Still, we’ll have to move forward doing the best we can. The same can - roughly - be said about derailing a thread. We’ll just have to move forward secure in the knowledge that some people will be unhappy. As always, though, posts are more likely to be sanctioned if they are rude, dismissive or insulting to other thread participants. It’s always best to avoid those. It’s certainly possible for an atheist to participate in a thread on religion with respect and courtesy. The same is true of the reverse or course. And, honestly, for any thread topic. Except Mets fans. Feh. So report such posts if you feel they cross the line. Reports are always better than not in such cases. Standard disclaimer applies, of course. Just because you report something doesn’t mean we’re required to act on that report. I just like to make that clear because some posters who report things seem to believe we are. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/74 "2015-10-29T12:33:58Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#): > > Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps you too have been brainwashed by dreck? > > - religion is terrorists and explosions > - God cares if you masturbate > > I think you are just copying what other people have told you, and you’ve never really thought it through for yourself. It certainly isn’t realistic. > > Plus, of course tghe fact that atheism isd your dogma, and you will disavow those who express non-atheistic views. > > Intellectually free my arse. The ‘religion is terrorists and explosions’ thing is something you made up and appears nowhere in my posts Are you denying that many religious people consider that their deity has preferences about their sexual conduct? Seriously? Are you actually going to make me cite that proposition? Think carefully before you answer lest you look a fool. As to my intellectual freedom, I was brought up in an environment where I could have been religious. My parents were brought up in church, there was religious instruction at school if I wanted it, my parents attended admittedly fairly milksop religious gatherings from time to time. I went to Sunday school a few times. I was also brought up in an environment where atheism was no problem at all. I read a lot of science fiction much of which was atheist or at least questioning in outlook. Feel free to let me know which direction I was brainwashed in. My clients and business partners and family and friends couldn’t give a rats about my religion. I could say I was anything from devout to atheist and they wouldn’t care. There is no question but that my intellectual environment is freer than that in which the great thinkers you named grew up in and lived in. ---
**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 29, 2015, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/75 "2015-10-29T13:19:40Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > we at least have evidence that terrorists and explosives and so on exist. . > [@Princhester](#): > > The ‘religion is terrorists and explosions’ thing is something you made up and appears nowhere in my posts :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/76 "2015-10-29T13:27:11Z")
Thanks for digging those quotes out for me. As I said, I never said “religion is terrorists and explosions” that’s something you made up. What’s your point? ---
**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 29, 2015, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/77 "2015-10-29T13:39:33Z")
What was \*your \*point when you talked about “terrorists and explosives” then? ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/78 "2015-10-29T13:46:16Z")
They exist, which makes 9/11 terrorist conspiracy theories (loony as they are) more plausible than wild tales about farcical deities that make the world in seven days and have important opinions about whether humanoid lifeforms on the third rock from the sun stimulate their own sex organs. If you go back and consider your post #26, you will see why this is relevant. Really, if you are not going to keep up and/or you are going to misquote, you just don’t pass the bar for being worth my time. Bye. ---
**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 29, 2015, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/79 "2015-10-29T14:04:25Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > Yeah that was unfair John. Robert is leaving the door open to better posting, but also claiming that his behavior wasn’t out of the ordinary in GD. Fair enough. Looked like nothing more than the classic non-apology apology to me. YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Bravo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_bravo/32/493_2.png) [@Johnny\_Bravo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Bravo)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/80 "2015-10-29T14:09:51Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > It’s showing the flag to say, “Well, since there is no Heaven, this is a pointless discussion. However, Thomas Aquinas said this, and Saint Augustine said that, and Pope Leopold once said something else.” It’s getting in the zap…but then transcending it and working within the hypothetical. It’s a little threadshitty, but it also adds to the actual intended discussion. Why get in the “zap” at all, especially in that manner? It’s still a dick move and has absolutely no purpose other than to belittle the creator of the thread and everyone who has engaged in the conversation. If a hypothetical Christian went into a thread about some minutiae of, say, Islamic law and said, “I’m not a Muslim, but x y z,” that would be fine, right? If he went into a thread and said, “Since all Muslims are going to burn in fiery hellpits for all eternity, this is a pointless discussion. However, x y z,” that would be a dick move too. What’s the point? If you have something constructive to add to a conversation about religion, you’re more than capable of doing without “showing the flag” or “getting in the zap.” Just, you know, don’t be a jerk. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933.md?page=5)