There appears to be, if not exactly a new sheriff in town, then a not-very-articulated new standard for what constitutes a Great Debate.
I started this in GD and although it didn’t get nuked from orbit, it got booted to MPSIMS. Yet it followed closely on the heels of Did We Treat Transgenderism Better in the Past, and I would have thought its debate-relevance was sufficiently obvious. Maybe the new standard is “nothing that looks likely to become a train wreck”. But what’s immune from that? If it weren’t controversial enough to have the potential for fueling a train wreck it wouldn’t constitute much of a debate either, would it?