::throws a pebble at Giraffe::
Well, I wasn’t talking about getting rid of the troll rule. Just add something like “The mods reserve the right to close any thread they consider too incoherent/unfocused/inflammatory, so try to make your posts as clear as possible”, or something like that. Something still vague that addresses the point.
OK, I see what you’re saying. Not a new rule so much as a guideline. That’s not a bad idea.
If I were a mod, I’d have closed it too. The guy was only semi-coherent, it was pretty sad. Plus, you know, it was an amusingly indirect RO thread, and I hate those.
Got it. Thanks! 
I have no problem with God and evil. I suppose that’s because of how I define both of them. If God is the facilitator of goodness and evil is its obstruction, then if there is to be free moral will, there needs to be a choice between facilitation and obstruction.
Hmm, I tend to agree. I think sometimes people tend to feel stifled for what you excellently labeled as “pruning”; much of the time, when moderators are criticized for thread closures, it tends to fall into this category in one way or another.
I don’t want people to feel that we’re holding scoreboards for worthy or unworthy threads (I’m sure I’d be ranked among the snooty French judges) but at the same time, we want the board to be interesting. Allowing people to post any old crap with no focus is bad for the board in the long run. Such threads (as this one) are often given some time to grow and develop, but when they…erm…‘fail to flourish’, they can and should be closed.
There’s only so much space on the front page of each forum, and sometimes you have to make choices. If there’s an unkempt homeless man screaming in the park about aliens and the CIA while a band’s playing, I don’t really mind him being ushered aside. Likewise, with threads such as Omegaman’s.
I’d be happy to see this codified in a guideline if folks feel put out by such closures, though, typically the rule-reading types are not the types who are posting in this manner, or cluttering the board through stream of consciousness rambling and clumsy insults of their critics.
God cannot be the facilitator of anything, because in my experience facilitators come equipped with PowerPoint presentations, and PowerPoint is clearly the work of the Devil. QED.
A question for Giraffe, Mr. Dibble, and others who might have found it to be incoherent: would you say that it was incoherent because it concerned subject matter that is unfamiliar to you? It is conceivable that an OP about, say, a QM interpretation might be incoherent to quite many people, including some mods. But would that violate the suggested guideline?
But He uses Etch A Sketch!
God no! That’s the first step down a slippery path. Far better that you mods take some shit now and again than we stifle the board’s Omegamen with anything that isn’t arbitrary and capricious on its face.
So I’m told ;p
Druids are Satan’s minions, everyone knows that, with their cowls, Sacred Groves and human sacrifice.
I thought it was incoherent. No, it wasn’t the subject matter, but the lack of grammar and a clear train of argument that made it incoherent for me. It seemed very stream-of-consciousness, rather than a reasoned, thought-out argument.
Is QM quantum mechanics? Regardless, I think even if the subject matter itself is unfamiliar, you can tell whethere there’s a problem of yourself not understanding and and incoherence of the post itself. I might not get what you mean by A, B or C, but I can see you’re arguing A plus B equals C. Plus I could always ask the person with the unfamiliar subject matter to explain or dumb it down for me; an incoherent poster wouldn’t be able to. Perhaps any guideline would work better as used against a pattern of posting, rather than a single one.
Wasn’t Satan created to be pitted? Isn’t he like the eternal fall-guy, the universal scapegoat? The angel of injustice?
Thanks, Rev. I understand better what y’all are saying about incoherence.
No, that i’m leaving my pocket out for him.maybe we should wait to see what the mods have to say before going any further though. Here, they are the the law and you should show the proper respect for them in as far as bringing up the op of the closed thread . Understand ?
Don’t take this the wrong way but please don’t direct any more comments to me. I DO believe you are full of shit .
Are you supposed to be a Reverend of some kind or what ?
You can answer that because now I’m curious as to what exactly your all about .
Storm in a teapot. Guy’s as close as it comes to a basketcase. Pitting fuckin’ Satan?! Fuck. You’re either on too many drugs or are lacking a bunch.
Might be “fun” running into such a nutter at a bar – with a couple under your belt – but I see no reason at all why the SDMB has to give a venue to every street-corner, apocalyptic merchant-of-doom nutcake, a voice.
After all, we’ve still have more than enough Neo-con ideologues doing that. Although, obviously, after their utter and complete failure, in much more subdued ways. Not like they have much of a choice either.
And then, there’s also Shodan. Just how much lower do you guys want the overall intellect of this place to go down?
You know, you’re not actually in a position to dictate what others may or may not post here.
For me it was incoherent because he was not engaging other posters coherently. I was enjoying the thread and wouldn’t have called for closure but it was frustrating in that music was blaring but there didn’t seem to be anyone home to answer the door.
Er, what would be the right way to take that, exactly?