Czarcasm, I'd like to continue this conversation...

[Irishman]

Oakminster said:

No, I don’t know that they belong there, do know that Czarcasm tends to send them there for reasons that are not entirely clear to me.

Well, now you do know that they belong there. The forum description is

For long-running discussions of the great questions of our time. This is also the place for religious debates and (if you feel you must) witnessing.

Perhaps that isn’t specific enough, now that IMHO exists. GD has always been the home for debating politics and religion, two major hot-button topics that get heated easily.

Also, not sure I know what the difference between a “frank exchange of views” and a “debate” is.

That I’m less clear on as well. “I like ___ …” is an opinion. “Why do you like ___ …” is discussing the opinion, “Your reasoning for liking ___ is wrong…” is debating. The mods have stated that debating in IMHO is not off limits, but debating certain topics in IMHO is off limits.

I think I can say something like “I like guns” in IMHO. Someone on the other side could probably say “I don’t like guns”. The problem is then what happens? Can I ask the opponent “Why don’t you like guns”? Can I tell the opponent “You should like guns because of X,Y,Z”? What if the opponent says something like “Gun nuts like to wave their big explosive penises to intimidate liberals”. Do I get to respond at all? Czarcasm has shown that he generally will not moderate liberals for saying provocative, inflammatory, and insulting things–in the instance that prompted this thread, reporting the statement did no good, yet those statements should be challenged, particularly on a board supposedly dedicated to fighting ignorance.

If you were to have a conversation about, oh, flavors if ice cream:

“I like chocolate.” “I don’t like chocolate.” Why don’t you like chocolate?" “Chocolate lovers like to wave their penises to intimidate vanilla lovers.” That would be fine in IMHO. It would sound weird, but that thread wouldn’t get moved. The difference is gun debate is one of those hot-button topics - like abortion, politics, religion. There’s no factual answer, it’s about an opinion* (I support free gun ownership/I support banning all guns). It brings out very strong polarized positions. Thus it goes in Great Debates - you know, the place for the Great topics rather than the minor topics like ice cream flavor.

If instead that answer was “Chocolate lovers like to wave their penises to intimidate liberals,” then that would be sending the discussion into politics. It may be wrong, or based on screwy reasoning, or whatever, but if that’s why he hates chocolate that is the answer. Arguing over the justification that chocolate lovers hate liberals will be a political discussion and thus needs to occur in the politics forum.

This breakdown is the distinction that the forum descriptions are trying to make by describing Great Debates as

For long-running discussions of the great questions of our time.

and IMHO as

For frank exchanges of views on less-than-cosmic topics.

The distinction between “great” and “less-than-cosmic” is intended to signify the difference in heat and venom between “I like guns” and “I like chocolate”.
Perhaps this is the opportunity for a suggestion to make the “descriptions” more descriptive, something along the lines of

Great Debates
For long-running discussions of the great questions of our time, especially politics. This is also the place for religious debates and (if you feel you must) witnessing.

Maybe you should make a thread about that.

You did a better job of explaining some things than I have.

Well, I’m not caught up in the middle of it, so I’m a bit more objective.

---

*Yes, there can be factual discussions - gun laws in other countries show xxx. Soandso said XXX. The policy in California is xxx. But the root of the issue is opinion over the value of owning guns.

[Oakminster]

I consider “Cosmic” topics to be things like religion, the meaning of life, morality–really high brow stuff. Guns and politics just don’t seem cosmic to me. They seem mundane.

[Skywatcher]

@Oakminster

I consider “Cosmic” topics to be things like religion, the meaning of life, morality–really high brow stuff. Guns and politics just don’t seem cosmic to me. They seem mundane.

You’re on the wrong board, then.

[Fenris]

@Irishman

Oh come on, you’re saying you don’t know that debates on politics, abortion, and religion belong in GD?

Actually, Health Care Reform fits under politics, and belongs in GD.

This is factually incorrect (sadly–I support the position you’re advocating!). Except for “Games” and “CS”, all forums are open to all topics. I’ve started and/or participated in at least a dozen "PLEASE make a “All-Politics” forum. And every single time, we’re told that with the exceptions above, any topic can go in any forum if you phrase it right and they don’t want to create a politics forum because it would be another “specialty” forum like The Game Room.

[mutantmoose]

I’ve always wondered where breaking news goes. Y’know, when some big news event occurs (eg a terrorist attack) and you want to report it to others and maybe get more info

GD - There’s no real debate to be had, just discussion
GQ - There’s no question - we all know what happened

That only leaves MPSIMS but it’s not mundane or pointless.

[Fenris]

Sadly, it most often gets dumped in The Pit (and occasionally in GD)

[Skywatcher]

@mutantmoose

I’ve always wondered where breaking news goes. Y’know, when some big news event occurs (eg a terrorist attack) and you want to report it to others and maybe get more info

GD - There’s no real debate to be had, just discussion
GQ - There’s no question - we all know what happened

That only leaves MPSIMS but it’s not mundane or pointless.

Yet MPSIMS is where you’ll find the thread on 9/11 as it happened.

[Irishman]

Oakminster said:

I consider “Cosmic” topics to be things like religion, the meaning of life, morality–really high brow stuff. Guns and politics just don’t seem cosmic to me. They seem mundane.

Well, that’s where you’re wrong. Okay, more correctly, you’re out of synch with this board. Guns and politics are some of those moral high ground topics that people stake out their territory and defend to the death. They are perennial hot button topics that don’t have a factual conclusion, because they are opinion topics. Ergo, they belong in GD.

Fenris said:

This is factually incorrect (sadly–I support the position you’re advocating!). Except for “Games” and “CS”, all forums are open to all topics.

Read more carefully. I said “debates about… belong in GD”. I suppose technically I didn’t say “debates about” Health Care Reform, and therefore you have a point. My intent was “debates about”, though, which synchs with what I said.

Polls about politics go in the poll forum, but discussions about politics goes in GD because the topics are those hot-button issues. You can post a General Question about politics if it has a factual answer (What exactly did Senator Loudmouth say that got him into so much trouble?). You could Pit a political issue. But a debate about the merits of a political position goes in the Debate forum.

mutantmoose said:

I’ve always wondered where breaking news goes. Y’know, when some big news event occurs (eg a terrorist attack) and you want to report it to others and maybe get more info
…
That only leaves MPSIMS but it’s not mundane or pointless.

The name is misleading. MPSIMS is where major life developments go, like where the “In Memoriam” sticky lists the dopers who have died, and has links to the announcements of their deaths.

[Oakminster]

Got to say I think this is unprecedented. A mod absolutely refuses to respond in any meaningful way to legitimate questions about his moderation. I expect better from an SDMB mod.

[bucketybuck]

@Oakminster

legitimate

Ha. Ha. Ha.

Is it an insult to hope that another poster gets laid in the near future?

[AClockworkMelon]

Threads go by very quickly on these boards… haven’t been around for the past two days or so. All the other threads have zoomed away… but this one lingers.

[Shodan]

@Oakminster

Got to say I think this is unprecedented. A mod absolutely refuses to respond in any meaningful way to legitimate questions about his moderation. I expect better from an SDMB mod.

You’ve never seen the mods stonewall before? Seriously?

Regards,
Shodan

[ivan_astikov]

@AClockworkMelon

Threads go by very quickly on these boards… haven’t been around for the past two days or so. All the other threads have zoomed away… but this one lingers.

Like a fart in an elevator.

[Oakminster]

@ivan_astikov

Like a fart in an elevator.

I agree Czarcasm’s refusal to respond in any meaningful way stinks. At the very least, he needs to acknowledge/explain his entirely inappropriate response to the first PM and acknowledge/explain his political bias affecting his decisions as a moderator.

[Munch]

Holy shit. Move on already!

[Oakminster]

I see Czarcasm has returned from a six-day absence. Maybe he’s ready to talk about this now…

[Bricker]

For what it’s worth, I have also felt that, despite Czarcasm’s strong denial, his moderating decisions fall along predictable partisan lines, expressed mainly in the absence of action.

We might imagine the Irish cop that hates Italians. When it’s Vito and Tony found with a bottle of rum, it’s confiscated and their parents called to come pick them up from the station and show up for court for the underage drinking charge. But when Mike and Pat are caught with their bottle, he sends them off with an unspoken, no-consequences warning. No one argues that his charges against the first pair are unfounded, but his bias is evident in how the second pair are treated more leniently.

In this case, of course, it’s to O’Der Trihs’ benefit that McCzarcasm is on the beat.

[ToeJam]

Bricker, Why do you hate the Irish?

[Bricker]

@ToeJam

Bricker, Why do you hate the Irish?

Because they’re drunks, of course. Drunks who hate the Italians.

[Bricker]

@Czarcasm

[Moderator Note]If you wish to debate Catholic religious beliefs, take it to Great Debates.[/Moderator Note]

No warning now, Seamus. Get along, and stay out o’ trouble, me boyo!