Feel free to start a “I Hate Black Licorice” thread. I won’t be permitted to post there, because feelings might be hurt.
Moderator Note
It’s not perfectly fine. He received a warning for it. I only just issued the warning today because I did not have time last night to go through the thread to see the context.
This also has absolutely nothing to do with the topic being discussed in this ATMB thread.
Sweet. Now would you care to respond to the chorus complaining about the thread closure?
I’m sure I can’t do that without breaking multiple forum rules and possibly some portions of the Geneva Convention, so I will have to seethe in silence as usual.
The topic itself is fine. If someone wants to start a topic about their positive experiences with abortion, and only positive experiences, I don’t have a problem with that.
The problem with this particular thread is that it is titled “Positive abortion news of the day”, so it is clearly a take on the Positive Gun News of the Day thread. What does abortion have to do with gun control? Absolutely nothing. The only thing they share in common is that they are both hot-button issues with highly polarized beliefs on either side.
The fact that HMS Irruncible chose to post such a controversial topic, and relate it to the gun control thread, all at the exact same time that this is being hotly discussed in ATMB is far too much of a coincidence to be innocent. It is not an unrelated, innocent thread.
The topic itself is not the problem. The fact that it was done in a way to intentionally pour gasoline onto the fire is the problem.
Since the topic itself isn’t the problem, I will re-open the thread. I will also change the title.
Thank you. I think you should rescind the warning as well – the only problem, if there was one, appears to have been the thread title – and you’re changing that. A warning seems excessive.
And “related” doesn’t mean “trolling”. This was a good and interesting topic for a new thread. Likely the gun thread discussion made the poster in question think about possible other interesting (if controversial) topics that would be similar, and he started a thread, along with a very personal anecdote that is both interesting and highly relevant to the thread. That seems entirely in keeping with the spirit of the board and the particular forum.
I would think that an association with the “What is Positive Gun News?” thread in this forum would be what came to mind-a thread where the Mods told us that other “positive” threads would get the same treatment as that one.
So “Positive News” is now forbidden in the title for any other topics?
I still don’t see how the intentions of posting that thread were necessarily “dishonest”. Thinking, while in another ATMB thread about gun discussions, “hey, an abortion thread structured the same way might be really interesting”, and then starting one, should not be the kind of thing that should be discouraged on the board, IMO.
I was surprised, too, to see that this thread was considered ‘trolling.’ It didn’t seem like trolling, but rather, simply a spin-off of the Positive Gun News thread.
As long as it’s not done in such a way as to make it a commentary on the Positive Gun News of the Day thread and the moderation here, I don’t have a problem with “Positive News” thread titles.
But that doesn’t really deserve a warning, does it? Just change the title, as you did. Seems clear that HMS Irruncible legitimately wanted to discuss positive experiences with abortion, offering his own personal account. It wasn’t “dishonest” of him to start a threat on that legitimate topic, and offer his own personal anecdote.
I did read post #2; it didn’t convince me. And to be frank neither did the other anecdotes given. Partly because of the thread title and partly from its timing. Try it again when the anti-positive-gun-news crowd hasn’t been so active in ATMB -------- probably fine. But for now I still believe the kill shot was the right move. Call it “public safety” or what you want but it was the right move.
But again, as Czarcasm did, he duplicated the whole thing making it clear just what it was; same with a lot of the other spin-off threads that pop up here. Whatever the intent of the OP here it just came out sour and blaming the Mods as others do … I can’t make that reach.
Likely the gun thread discussion made the poster in question think of? It was mentioned by title and description fer cripes-sake. 
Look, I will agree that its more being a jerk than being a troll MAYBE but -------- isn’t that really what a warning is for? “OK, we’re talking circumstantial but consider yourself notified” in a sense? Nope; I would let the warning stand. And were it me I doubt I would mind it very much.
It took a bit but I think the end result came out about where it should; thread opened and all of us a little smarter.
I don’t see what’s wrong with the title, either. That is, if mods think it needs clarification, then clarify it. If mods think there should only be one thread permitted on the board that includes the word “positive”, that strikes me as a really odd requirement, but if so clarify it and enforce it on all subjects; but I still don’t see why the first one it’s enforced on would merit a warning, especially with no such requirement listed in the forum rules. And I most definitely don’t see why this one specific subject should be forbidden to use the word “positive” if threads on no other subject are forbidden to do so.
My thread didn’t discuss or reference gun control, even implicitly.
Now… why did I feel safe in creating that thread? I’m not playing stupid here; I’m aware of other discussions that have gone on. I read the other conversations and judged that advocacy threads were OK as long as they were civil, even if they were callouts to other threads. My thread wasn’t a callout/retort to other threads, unlike ‘Positive Gun News’ (which is seen as OK).
It seemed that I judged wrong. Maybe it’s something about the subject matter, or maybe something about me personally, or just that the whole ‘Positive News’ concept is problematic and we’d rather not do any new ones. Or if I take the stated reasoning, it’s “too soon” after some other discussion (funny how we always fall back on good old “too soon” when other reasoning fails.)
I don’t see much point in re-opening after the well has been thus poisoned. However I would appreciate having the warning rescinded.
Good grief! This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen posted by a mod.
I disagree, I thought it was a takeoff on the Are you pro-choice because you are smart? thread, a thread which has no place in MPSIMS & I actually reported - to be moved to GD (or the Pit) That thread has to do with what one believes; what one believes is not necessarily correlated to their intelligence level. It seemed to me like HMS Irruncible’s thread was ‘I’m pro-choice because it had an impact on my life’.
It has, rightly, been reopened, but the warning should also be rescinded.
Bulllllllshit.
Leave it as is. You were wrong and now you’re still being wrong. Don’t be an asshole because you think someone else is being an asshole, especially when you have no real evidence to support your position.
Are we to infer that only one subset of beliefs appears to be entitled to a protected safe-space thread?