# Can we have a new rule in GD

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933>\
**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:** 1\
**Showing post:** 37

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\
**Post date:** [October 28, 2015, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933/37 "2015-10-28T16:17:48Z")

</div>

> [@Jackmannii](#):
>
> Are you now specifying that your proposed “new rule” (which allegedly is needed to accompany or supplant current board strictures against Being A Jerk or threadshitting) would apply only to threads relating to Christianity?

In this case I think it would just apply to **Robert163** because as **tomndebb** said:

> [@A few questions about the Christian heaven](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-questions-about-the-christian-heaven/735643/220):
>
> The notion of some not-very-well-read internet poster dictating to several billion people the ways in which they are to regard their holy books, (in which said poster does not believe), is risible. Your insistence in dragging your error into one thread after another to declare a point that fails on the evidence is merely silly.

It sounds like Robert163 has an agenda to derail Christian threads.

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-have-a-new-rule-in-gd/735933)._
