I’ve noticed (in GD at least) that there seems to be a general consensus about certain topics or THEE topic; that discussing along these lines seems somewhat desired; yet somehow off-topic unless it is framed within the context of a clearly defined debate seeking ‘resolution’.
To this degree; the same questions keep getting answered; the same questions keep being found; and people just wait until another thread along those lines can bring up these ideas again.
I believe the conflict comes in that posters along this line realize that they aren’t proposing a debate from start to finish; but are bringing up general topics under the frame of moving from ‘finish’ to see if a start even exists – or what have you.
Sure, you can debate international policy; search laws, list names and bibliographies, links and quotes to crumble the OP or let the OP stand. That seems to be a wonderful function for GD.
How about posing questions that aren’t GQ material; don’t state an opinion (at least overtly); don’t propose a debate; use metaphors and allegories that may confuse the average Pit user; Aren’t asking forum administrators questions about behavior or policy or what-not; isn’t talking about ‘art’ specifically.
There seems to be something which is very strong on these message boards (investigative/exploratory conversations about certain topics) which don’t have a clear designation.
As such; the noise to signal ratio is severely diminished - as are interesting (IMO) insights into what the hell is going on; how the tools to use the term “Straight Dope” work, and whether they may in themselves be misleading at times - or not!
More of a forum to analyse process; make proposals; learn insights; solidify assurance or clarity (if that’s possible!).
That’s all.
-Justhink