Political jabs now allowed in GQ (as long as it is anti-Trump)?

[Saint_Cad]

Here are examples of political jabs that I have found in GQ, reported, waited 24 hours and no action from any mod.

How many of these do you think should be modded according to Straight Dope rules.

In regards to whether or not people in Iran can access twitter

@road_lobo

Likes are for sale. They signify almost nothing.

This is standard MAGAt vote brigading.

@RioRico

McD’s is the world’s most popular food chain. Does that make their crap edible?

Tramp’s xlated twit is the most popular Farsi twit ever. Does that make it real?

I recall a slogan from way back: “Eat shit, pigs! 200 million flies can’t be wrong!”

You are what you consume. I don’t consume that stuff - and I’m not deprived.

As to whether or not Apple can be forced to assist the FBI with breaking their phones’ security.

@edwardcoast

Exactly. They can huff and puff all they wish about laws, but the technology will rule.

I believe this is political thing, that they want to be able to read anyone’s secured data, and with the current administration I don’t trust their leadership to have good intentions.

Emphasis added

@Wolf333

Also, with the current administration, the information regarding a back door most likely WILL get out.

So what say you dopers? Are any or all of these political commentaries in General Questions? If so, then why haven’t mods done anything about them (they were reported)? Is anti-Trump commentary allowed in GQ now and if so can the mods explain why?

[MrDibble]

1 and 2, sure, I agree. 3 and 4, I don’t think so, they’re comments on perceived competency and intent relevant to the topic, not just gratuitous political jabs…

[Saint_Cad]

@MrDibble

1 and 2, sure, I agree. 3 and 4, I don’t think so, they’re comments on perceived competency and intent relevant to the topic, not just gratuitous political jabs…

That’s why my first question is which ones are inappropriate in GQ. I agree 1 and 2 definitely. I think 3 and 4 are borderline but I could see a mod reminding everyone to stick to the topic which is a legal question not a political one. Mods have done that many times before and would be appropriate here.

Then the question remains why were 1 and 2 not modded more than a day after a report is made?

[Colibri]

@Saint_Cad

Then the question remains why were 1 and 2 not modded more than a day after a report is made?

Incredible as it may seem, sometimes it’s because mods (at least some of them) have lives. I’ve been on vacation. I just got back from a seven-hour drive from western Panama. I’ll have a look at them tomorrow.

[DrDeth]

@Saint_Cad

That’s why my first question is which ones are inappropriate in GQ. I agree 1 and 2 definitely. I think 3 and 4 are borderline but I could see a mod reminding everyone to stick to the topic which is a legal question not a political one. Mods have done that many times before and would be appropriate here.

Then the question remains why were 1 and 2 not modded more than a day after a report is made?

Only #2 needs a warning, IMHO. #1 should be a note, the other two are not so bad.

[Colibri]

@Colibri

Incredible as it may seem, sometimes it’s because mods (at least some of them) have lives. I’ve been on vacation. I just got back from a seven-hour drive from western Panama. I’ll have a look at them tomorrow.

I have addressed the posts in question.

[DrDeth]

@Colibri

I have addressed the posts in question.

Very good call on both.

[MrDibble]

@DrDeth

Very good call on both.

Agreed.

[Darren_Garrison]

@Colibri

I’ve been on vacation. I just got back from a seven-hour drive from western Panama. I’ll have a look at them tomorrow.

Oh, be honest–you were performing exorcisms, weren’t you?

[Chronos]

Or inorcisms.

[Colibri]

@Darren_Garrison

Oh, be honest–you were performing exorcisms, weren’t you?

I was looking for a Townsend’s Warbler (among a few other species), which was my 880th species seen in Panama.

[Leo_Bloom]

Did they sound buzzily ethereal, or vice versa?

[Try2B_Comprehensive]

I just got warned for politicking in GQ. I don’t want to rail against the mods or even start a new thread, since this one is about that.

Is the rule- leave politics out of GQ altogether, or is it leave other posters and their politics out of it?

[Jasmine]

@Try2B_Comprehensive

I just got warned for politicking in GQ. I don’t want to rail against the mods or even start a new thread, since this one is about that.

Is the rule- leave politics out of GQ altogether, or is it leave other posters and their politics out of it?

A link would help.

[DrDeth]

@Jasmine

A link would help.

https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=22093511#post22093511

[Colibri]

@Jasmine

A link would help.

Here’s the post.

[Colibri]

@Try2B_Comprehensive

Is the rule- leave politics out of GQ altogether, or is it leave other posters and their politics out of it?

The rule is no political jabs. Political issues can be addressed but in a factual manner. Avoid posting your personal opinions on political issues.

The reason you got in trouble was because of specific commentary on the present administration;

@Try2B Comprehensive

Well, when you look at it that way, it starts to sound like Trump &co. are actually following the “unwritten law”. Looked at that way, it does kind of make sense. I say this not having found a lot of lenses for viewing the Trump administration that result in a lot of sense. It could be White Supremacy Itself, or more likely it is some modernized variant, I still don’t get all the details.** But, some kind of holy right to trample on any aspect of the system at their convenience?** Sounds like “unwritten law”.

…

**I think this could be what is actually the basis of GOP thought and policy these days, and explains the incredulous disconnect a lot of lefties have when trying to interpret contemporary righty behavior. **I can probably dredge up more examples another day, but yeah, I don’t like doing it either.

In my view, the bolded parts are the most problematic parts of your post, especially since you were answering your own OP.

If that’s what you wanted to discuss, you should have started the thread in GD or IMHO in the first place.

[Try2B_Comprehensive]

All right. My real problem as I see it is that I didn’t know exactly what I wanted to discuss. There are a mishmash of signals in the environment pointing at this subject that I only vaguely recall and couldn’t put my finger on. In trying to drag the mess of my brain into some approximation of clarity, I brought politics into it. My bad, I don’t blame the mods.

[Colibri]

Unless you have a clear factual question you want to discuss, it’s best to post in another forum rather than GQ. You can still get factual information in other forums, while having more leeway to discuss your political opinions.