Hey Frank? Can we get an answer?

[tomndebb]

The member it offended was clearly hypersensitive, and based on her subsequent responses seems to me to be quite neurotic. I don’t think you can use her as a an example of a typical member of this board.

I think you’d have to find different criteria than hypersensitive and quite neurotic to separate her from most of the posters I have encountered, lately.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@tomndebb

I think you’d have to find different criteria than hypersensitive and quite neurotic to separate her from most of the posters I have encountered, lately.

What the fuck? Are you talking about me? Jesus, man, do you have to follow me around everywhere I go spouting this same shit? What do I have to do, take out a restraining order against you?

Daniel

[tomndebb]

Well, you can file it with TubaDiva, then she can forward it to Ed who has to pass it back to whichever Administratator is in charge of bashing the errant Mods, this week, but if that is what you think you need to do, go ahead.

And just because I keep posting right after you in every thread, that does not mean that I am following you around. I was about to ask how you kept slipping posts in ahead of me every time I tried to say something.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@tomndebb

Well, you can file it with TubaDiva, then she can forward it to Ed who has to pass it back to whichever Administratator is in charge of bashing the errant Mods, this week, but if that is what you think you need to do, go ahead.

And just because I keep posting right after you in every thread, that does not mean that I am following you around. I was about to ask how you kept slipping posts in ahead of me every time I tried to say something.

sobs and runs away

[Banquet_Bear]

@abbie normal

I was going to reply with some witty answers to the responses but after reading Banquet Bear’s post I really cannot add anything other then he/she was able to put what I was trying to say, into words.

…I get that a lot

@Left Hand of Dorkness

That link is not as persuasive as you think it is ;).

Daniel

Ummm, well…

It was when I posted it dammit!!!

:: sobs and runs off as well ::

[Bippy_the_Beardless]

@Banquet Bear

…but you said the question was foolish. Do you no longer believe that? And if the OP is germophobic, so what? The question couldn’t be answered?

I said “Ribbing a doper for asking a foolish question, or a question foolishly” which I hoped would be read as either asking a foolish question or a normal question in in a foolish manner. Sorry if my statement wasnt clear enough.
This pretty much derails the rest of your comments about my answer.

@Banquet Bear

…the question was posted in General Questions by a fairly newbyish poster. Regardless of the contents of the OP, it should have been answered with just factual information. If the OP violated any “rules”, then the post should have been reported and no comment made. If the OP made some comments that could be classed as “ignorant”, then the best way to slap that down would be to post facts. UncleBeer posted some relevant citations, 3.855AM a relevent anecdote, everything else was pure speculation.
naita made an outright assertion, and when challenged by PatriotX to back it up, he/she didn’t, then admits that they were only “theorizing. " acsenray cited an article passed around the office, and concludes from that article that household items have more germs than the contents of luggage. TyCobb starts talking about how money has traces of cocaine, again no cite, and hardly any relevance to the OP. ** Lamar Mundane** states "This kind of stuff never even enters my mind. I am sure there are far more germs transferred from the airplane seat, the tray table, and the airline magazine than there are from the TSA inspectors, not to mention if you use the airplane toilet.” Nice assertion, where are the facts? He then states: “I think this qualifies as a phobia rather than a legitimate, rational concern.” By what thought process could that conclusion be reached?

Shangnasty then chimes in, agreeing with Lamar Mundane’s 'devestating logic, ’ implies the OP is concerned with trivial matters and drops the “bubble bomb.” It is only after all this nonsense that brightpenny really goes off the rails. 3.855AM 's anecdote shows that there was something to the OP, but because people considered that “I don’t think about that sort of thing” and “the OP was trivial in nature”, it doesn’t get any further than that.
…and if members of the public changed gloves every time they handled the doors at a public restroom, then your hyperbolic comparison may have had a point. As it stands, it reads nothing like the OP of the GQ thread.

By the way, here’s an active General Question framed as a rant that you may want to hijack: its gone 16 posts without any snark, and according to your criteria, if the question is framed as a rant, it’s open season to derail the thread, is it not?
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=353870
By the end of the thread, I was left wondering, well, is brightpenny right? What is the answer to her question? If someone can show me how the level of snark in the thread contributed to the fight against ignorance that we apparently are all battling, it would be appreciated. Instead we now have a newbie leaving the boards and a question left unanswered. Some victory.

Ribbing (gentle mockery) seems to me to be part and parcel of this boards procedure. The question wasn’t well answered because it wasn’t well put. It is quite clear that such things as using a public restroom or shaking hands are much greater risks to people, so what was left was the info from the doper who had worked as a baggage inspector and then the gentle ribbing.
The follow ups were quite nasty, but then again the saying that the experience on SDMB was like gang rape was also quite nasty.
As for fighting against ignorance, the snark helps teach people not to write questions in such a way that implies a particular answer is allready expected, especially when that answer is quite clearly wrong or overstated. In the same way your answer to me has taught me to try and be clearer when saying either the question is foolish, or the question is asked in a follish manner.

[Anaamika]

I just want to say, I would really like it if GQ was relegated solely to answers. No jokes, no snarks without an answer, no anecdotes. I have often started writing a post, realized it was GQ, and backed out of it.

Do I think this has any chance of happening? Nope. But I did want to make my point clear.

[Bippy_the_Beardless]

@Anaamika

I just want to say, I would really like it if GQ was relegated solely to answers. No jokes, no snarks without an answer, no anecdotes. I have often started writing a post, realized it was GQ, and backed out of it.

Do I think this has any chance of happening? Nope. But I did want to make my point clear.

I think this is a valid request, but I also think that one of the reason people are willing to answer quite complex questions here is because of the funness of these boards. After all most of the good answerers here actually get payed for their knowledge in their everyday jobs (thinking Quadop (sp?) and Briker ). If the requirement was for dry researched answers then I guess many people here would want to be payed for that work, like on google answers. Really the moderators here do a good job in keeping GQ polite and informative, and if questions become derailed then reporting it to a moderator and asking them to bring order to the thread is the best thing to do.
Maybe we should discus whether the moderators of GQ should be asked to do more to keep the ‘fluff’ out of GQ?

[SkipMagic]

@jjimm

Applause.

Acceptable Alternative.

[Larry_Griffin-Kentzel]

Originally posted by SkipMagic

Originally posted by jjimm

Applause.

Acceptable Alternative.

Applesauce?
:dubious:

[SkipMagic]

@Cajun Man

Applesauce?
:dubious: