Of course. I’ll be here til I’m banned or they manufacture a SDMB patch or lozenge, one or the other.
(Though I do think the thread and lockdowns were silly.)
No, not you either. The guy in the back, with the hat.
Sweeping together my odd thought into a pile:
- IMHO, the real dividing line between a ‘serious’ “name 100 ____ characters” thread, and a post-count party (besides the obvious “are there >100 characters?” test), is in the ground rules, particularly whether the posters are supposed to contribute something meaningful along with a character’s name.
For instance, if you’re supposed to name a character, and give a quote by or about that character as well, then the thread can become not just a listing of names, but one that provides a quick insight into each character.
I submit that if there are a decent set of ground rules, and if posters heed them for the most part, such threads are as worthwhile as anything else in the CS forum.
-
I’m kinda perplexed that Dex’ initial action was to close the serious threads, and leave the sarcastic ones open. I mean, if you want to encourage a plague of dumb CS threads, what better way to do it? Much of CS is about fairly lowbrow entertainment to begin with, and I have no problem with that. But I can’t think of an easier kind of thread to do sarcastic takeoffs of.
-
Why not let IMHO be the combined GQ/GD for sports, in addition to its other functions? To a certain extent, IMHO is already the place for ‘not-so-great’ debates, and as much of a sports fan as I am, I’ve gotta acknowledge that that describes sports debates to a T. And I agree with the point somebody made upthread that the people who can answer a GQ-type question about sports tend to spend less time in GQ than in other fora. That would certainly make it easier for sports junkies to find sports threads.
That’s probably just 'cause your in Colorado, though.
Who, me?
But what can be more elevated than talking about things like American Idol or Comic Books? Seriously. These are the myths of our times! The rags to riches stories and the mighty heroes that represent the best in us fighting evil. These are the re-telling of archetypal stories that are as old as man!
Good god man! Are you one of those people that thinks that just because something is popular, it’s value is somehow lessened?
You go, Binary!
I was explaining this to a class the other day, actually. They were researching “how people lived” in the 1890-1910 era. I was showing them old newspapers (hardcopy and online) and how the advertisements and “fluff” actually tell you MUCH more about the people than the articles on the Spanish American War and the Panama Canal, etc… Those you can read about in encyclopedia articles and history books, but the daily cartoons with horribly racist (by modern interp) stereotypes and the price of clothing and the editorials by people repulsed with indoor sewage removal and ragtime and the noise made by Model Ts and the like are actually way more interesting and insightful into the character of the times.
They had online newspapers in the 1890s!?
Wow.
Yep. They didn’t know it until the Internet was created, though.
That works as well. I suggested MPSIMS because I truly do think that sports are the epitome of “mundane and pointless.”
This is clearly not a new idea; Troy McClure SF proposed [post=4956377]the exact same idea[/post] almost two years ago. Dex’s reply:
Numerous other ATMB posts by various moderators have made it clear that the mods as a group just don’t like them. As in, moderators have to read threads, and nobody wants to do it. Hey, I get it, the mods are people too, and if they don’t like a particular topic, they aren’t going to champion their forum becoming the dedicated home for that topic. It’s just unfortunate that most sports fans around here have long seen this as a minor nuisance, and the official admin response is “if you don’t like it, go somewhere else.” (Phrased as “we do not want to be all things for all people.”)
Many posters have requested that sports threads be consolidated into a single existing forum (IMHO, MPSIMS, and CS have all been mentioned) many times over the years, and the mods have consistently responded with the standard reply of “forums are based on types of discussion, not topics.” When backed into a corner by pointing out that this rule doesn’t apply to movies, books, and music (which all get their own forum regardless of the type of discussion), they have admitted that it’s because they just don’t like them. That doesn’t seem to meet the standards of the SDMB in regards to sound reasoning.
Omni asked and articulated the exact position I’ve outlined in this thread when he opened the thread Where do Sports threads belong?. In particular [post=6957877]this post[/post]. I very much wanted to participate in that thread, but it was the day after I’d been slapped down for being an asshole, so it didn’t seem like the best time to criticize how the boards were being run. But with a few months of (hopefully) good citizenship under my belt since then, I’m throwing in my two cents now.
Link, please.
sigh
Here is the pit thread that links to the ATMB announcement that links to the pit thread that brought on the smackdown. (The latter also links back to the other two original threads involved.)
The OP forgot my favorite one:
I was working on a suppository, but testing has become rather more difficult now that Updike’s gone.
That’s not funny- my parents died because of a suppository administered by Fundamentalist Muslims on September 11! You just hated Updike because he was black. Sometimes.