Wow, you managed to insult the members (they will intentionally violate rules wholesale) AND the mods (quitters) in one sentence. Good job.
What exactly differentiates one of those from a valid claim or complaint? Obviously the mods would be the ones deciding that, but I am seeing an awful lot of grey area.
Yeah, I bet the mods would really enjoy deciding what is criticism and what is an insult. Hours of fun.
IMO (and I am not a mod) the difference would be what is actually occurring versus hyperbolic assumptions of the future.
Valid: Trump’s cast of clowns that he is nominating for his cabinet will ensure the Federal government gets nothing substancial done.
Invalid: Trump is going to lock up every prominent Democrat and Liz Cheney in Guantanamo Bay.
We wouldn’t need it if some posters here didn’t feel the need to insult Trump in threads that are inappropriate for it … hence THIS thread.
ETA: The other alternative would be if someone adds a Trump insult in an inappropriate thread its an automatic warning leading to a ban after 3. I suspect THAT would solve the problem especially as there are so many available threads for that.
If you think that’s insulting it’s on you. Which also demonstrates how flawed your idea is.
I like the idea though not the implementation.
IMO …
Create a new category named “Threads mentioning trump”.
Any thread mentioning that word is immediately moved there, period. Any post using circumlocutions triggers the sane response once reported.
Sorta like certain CTs that are already banned by rule, anything even generally about trump or his administration is immediately moved to the cesspool category where the folks who want to wallow in shit may do so and the rest of us can mute that category and get on with our lives.
The mods will interpret all this liberally, with the attitude that it is better to banish 100 trump-adjacent threads / posts than let one ambiguous case affect our other trump-free categories.
YMNV, but I favor scorched earth here.
Sounds like a good way to kill the board, actually.
I was posting from my phone and neglected my usual lead-in that this was a modest proposal. IOW, not a serious suggestion.
What?! This is a general-interest board about interesting facts. It would survive just fine if political discussion was completely banned.
Not gonna lie, I am heartened to see that there are still people strongly committed to not just “agree to disagree” if they feel that something is just fuckin’ unacceptable or something that must take precedence over any distraction of daily living (of course they may come back at me with that they don’t feel it, they know it and I should know it too). But the spiraling-down of threads into just two or three people endlessly refuting each other in cycle of [oh it’s dumb and it may get rough] vs. [rough? may? you enabling fool! they are going to kill us all for pleasure!], at some point starts to look like a test of who will have the last word by sheer exhaustion.
However the Straight Dope itself was never entirely politically sterile. Cecil got some clever digs in at various figures and policies during his run, that these days would get at the very least a barrage of whatabouts. So the SDMB was wont to similar commentary.
No, because in practice that always means that a particular political viewpoint is mandated from on high while everyone pretends political talk is not allowed. Because in the real world political issues are basically impossible to avoid, and “apolitical” means “politics that I agree with”. As well, talk about “interesting facts” is inherently political since denial or acceptance of the facts is central to many political positions.
And because a substantial portion of the board would take such proposals as - accurately - an assertion they they, their lives and their freedom are considered to be of no importance. To be blunt, such proposals would be taken as implicit support for Trump by the board administration.
I guess I view this board very differently. It’s a divertissement to teach and learn. It’s not important in any meaningful way. Yeah, we can talk about politics, but that’s not ever the point of board.
Even the tagline about fighting ignorance is an inherently political statement. It may not be the point of the board, but it’s certainly one of the points of the board, and one that’s assuming huge importance right now.
Not sure if I agree with that. The tagline was tied to being a smart-alec answers question from long before search engines. I don’t see it as political in nature.
Being anti-ignorance is a political position.
It can be, but it isn’t always.
Considering how much you threadshit, it’s no wonder you don’t like the idea.
Honest question: Does this mean you agree someone should be able to disparage rump in any thread - even one that has nothing to do with him like the above examples.
I’ve seen the term “Trump Derangement Syndrome” used to describe this kind of behavior:
I also wish people would not insert politics into practically every conversation. Even if it’s not TDS, it seems like all anyone wants to talk about these days is politics.I don’t even like talking about politics that I agree with, much less with politics that I don’t. I pretty much avoid all my neighbors because a greeting like “How are you doing?” will likely be met with something like “I’d be fine if Politicalparty would stop trying to run my life!”. If the topic is directly related to politics, then that’s one thing. But I don’t like how politics seems to work it’s way pretty much every topic these days.
No, it’s an expression of grudging respect for those who are willing to die on the hill of OMG Trump!!! even as the rest of us move along with regular living. Not up to me anyway to say what the board should or should not allow.