It is distinctly different in a crucial way. There isn’t an intense national political debate on banning mass killings. Bone’s OP rather unashamedly asks for ammo for one side of a heated political debate on guns. Paul in Qatar’s does not. In fact, in post #7 he explicitly says “This list does not address mass shootings”.
Frankly, a thread gathering ammo for a political debate under the MPSIMS politeness shield is kinda bullshit.
There are plenty of examples in that thread where there is discussion whether an example that is cited is actually “positive.” Those posts have not been moderated. A wider debate about gun control would not be allowed because it’s not in GD and would be considered a hijack. Discussions within the scope of the thread are fine. Hijacking it is not.
Loach – could you weigh in on my example? If I post to that thread celebrating “common sense gun control reform” passing in a certain state, or even celebrating a total ban on guns in a state, as “positive gun news” - would that be allowed?
There are examples of what Loach is talking about, disagreeing with the “positiveness” of news items, immediately in the thread. What you are asking about is explicitly what he said is verboten: starting a gun legislation debate.
In that case, I would agree with some of the other posters here and humbly suggesst that the title of the thread IS misleading, but not in the way that the OP implies. The thread is not looking for “positive gun news”, it’s looking for stories about guns being used in self defense. Which, as some in this thread have argued, isn’t necessarily positive.
Yeah, I’m the one who argued that. Lol.
If you are sincerely unable to figure this out on your own, I’d advise you to follow engineer_comp_geek’s advice and not post at all in the thread.
I think in this case, we can interpret “positive gun news” to mean “pro-gun news”.
I like to think that I can treat posters like responsible adults. The thread is over three years old with over 1500 posts. Pretty much everyone is having no difficulty understanding what the thread is about with the current title. The OP can’t pretend he doesn’t understand either given the fact that he’s participated pretty much from the beginning and has been mod noted in it at least once.
And I disagree that the thread is only about self defense. Read post #1. The OP brings up two different issues. One is not about self defense use of a firearm. Granted it’s to be expected that most news items will involve self defense but that is not all the thread is about.
Clearly. I don’t like that, because it unfairly (IMHO) grants legitimacy to one side of the argument. But I can live with it.
You can tell the appropriateness of the post from the tone of the post alone. The sarcasm is just dripping from the post.
In one thread. It’s a big internet.
I was just thinking about that. If I was going to get all rules-lawyery, I might say that by introducing a court case in his OP, he opened the floor to discussion of legislation. I didn’t notice any real legal analysis of that, but would you have allowed such analyzing despite not being in GD?
Only in that thread. There other threads for the other side.
That’s fair, hence why I can live with it.
Just as grist for the mill, would “DA Announces Arrest in Illegal Weapon Sale” be thread shitting? It’s positive for both sides. “See all these guns!” side as well as “See? The current laws are enough” side. And a bad guy got arrested.
Excellent mod decision. Well not really: downgrade that to “No-brainer mod decision”.
Nonetheless, the MPSIMS thread looks problematic on a board devoted to fighting ignorance. Upon reflection, I recommend a Pit thread entitled, “Positive Gun News Discussion”. It would
a) permit discussion of allegedly positive gun news,
b) permit “discussion” of allegedly positive gun news,
c) permit discussion of allegedly “positive” gun news, as well as
d) permit discussion of allegedly positive gun “news”.
That should cover it.
I would rather not engage in what ifs. It will all be driven by context and I don’t want to encourage posters try to get right up to the edge of threadshitting.
No brainer? I’m uniquely qualified.
I would just like to point out that discussion is not banned from that thread. There have been many reports over the last few years that I have not acted on in order to allow communication. I have stepped in when it started to turn into a train wreck at times due to some posters inability to play nice. I will most likely have to moderate more closely going forward.
Discussion is allowed if it sticks with the subject manner. No threadshitting. No hijacking the thread. Remember it’s MPSIMS so a wider debate would belong in GD. For the most part posters have been able to have discussions in that thread for three years including those that are anti-gun. It has just been a few posters that have tried to derail the thread.
I think that, in practice, such a thread would overlap sufficiently with the current Pit thread as to be redundant. But hey, I’m not the Pit moderator, and it’s not like we haven’t had redundant threads before.
Oh come on. If someone started a thread titled “Positive liberal news” you guys would be elbowing each other in the face for the opportunity to allow our most… um… well-known and Regard,-ed members to empty their trolly bowels all over it with drive-by shitposts. This board’s accommodation to conservative fragility is ruining it, IMO.