# Can't we post opinions on the presidential debates in IMHO?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cant-we-post-opinions-on-the-presidential-debates-in-imho/268389>\
**Category:** About This Message Board\
**Created:** [October 9, 2004, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cant-we-post-opinions-on-the-presidential-debates-in-imho/268389 "2004-10-09T19:37:01Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![SnakeSpirit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snakespirit/32/7271_2.png) [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)\
**Post date:** [October 9, 2004, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cant-we-post-opinions-on-the-presidential-debates-in-imho/268389/1 "2004-10-09T19:37:01Z")

</div>

**Otto** tried to start a thread in IMHO about the 2nd presidential debate. Sounds logical because there’s a thread there about the 1st presidential debate! He didn’t want to debate the debates, just _share opinions_, which as we all know is a no-no in GD.

**Czarcasm shut him down.**

So, is this a _new_ rule? Or was **Czarcasm** acting impetuously? Or is there something else?

It’s hard to play in a game where you don’t know the rules. I’ve heard **Czarcasm’s** explanation, and I don’t buy it, and [this pit thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=5349234#post5349234) shows we have lots of company.

So what’s up?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![InvidiousCourgette](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e47c2d/32.png) [@InvidiousCourgette](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/InvidiousCourgette)\
**Post date:** [October 9, 2004, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cant-we-post-opinions-on-the-presidential-debates-in-imho/268389/2 "2004-10-09T19:58:58Z")

</div>

Well I understand **Czarcasm** shutting one of the threads down as they were bound to end up pretty similar. Given that, I think he was correct to close the IMHO thread as it started second. That said, maybe there is an argument that the GD thread should have been moved to IMHO. There was, after all, a lot of HO opined. Something to consider for Round Trois?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\
**Post date:** [October 9, 2004, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cant-we-post-opinions-on-the-presidential-debates-in-imho/268389/3 "2004-10-09T21:39:41Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> He didn’t want to debate the debates, just share opinions, which as we all know is a no-no in GD.

Yeah, but that’s not what he said in his OP. That’s all ex post facto argument. He started a thread which, on the face of it, any Moderator would have said, “Hey, this belongs in Great Debates and is, in fact, already there” and closed the thread. Yeah, we might have said it with slightly different wording, we all have our own styles and amount of time to spend, but it would have had the same result.

Now, afterwards, we have complaint that something else was “intended.” Gimme a break.

This isn’t a new rule. We’ve always tried to avoid multiple threads on the same topic, and we’ve always said that political discussion belongs in Great Debates. **Snakespirit,** if you don’t buy **Czarcasm** ’s explanation, you might want to go to the section of the website called “[Buy Stuff](https://securesite.chireader.com/cgi-bin/dopestore/buystuff.bat)” where you could buy a mug or t-shirt or book.

I’m closing this thread because (a) it’s already being discussed in the Pit, and (b) this ain’t the place for “complaints and other discussion regarding administration of the SDMB.”

(I suppose we’ll now see a Pit thread by **Snakespirit** about how he intended the thread here to be a “technical” question. I’ll forestall that by saying, OK, I’ve answered it.)