# What constitutes an off-topic comment? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [April 19, 2013, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134 "2013-04-19T14:37:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/141 "2013-04-20T22:43:28Z")
Fair enough. Lets go with THAT definition of “always”. Which is pretty much my other definition of always and therefore your point is mooooot. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/142 "2013-04-20T22:48:33Z")
> [@ladyfoxfyre](#): > > He’s getting slammed because he was trolling the shit out of threads on this topic. It would seem he wanted to be made an example of. Oh. I didn’t know that. OK. ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Lendervedder](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_lendervedder/32/8488_2.png) [@Happy\_Lendervedder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Lendervedder)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/143 "2013-04-20T22:55:10Z")
When we talk about this whole brouhaha in years to come, can we refer to it as “Bonergate,” since it grows increasingly obvious that I’m going to be best remembered for one of the stupidest and most sophomoric posts I ever made anyway. ---
**Author:** ![akennett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee59a6/32.png) [@akennett](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/akennett)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/144 "2013-04-20T23:36:22Z")
> [@Happy\_Lendervedder](#): > > When we talk about this whole brouhaha in years to come, can we refer to it as “Bonergate,” Of course not! That sort of misandrist language cannot be allowed to stand! ---
**Author:** ![ladyfoxfyre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@ladyfoxfyre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladyfoxfyre)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/145 "2013-04-20T23:47:31Z")
:rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2013, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/146 "2013-04-21T00:03:09Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > First, that’s totally rude. Second, if the PC thing is to use different terms, that actually maps closer to the good manners we’re discussing on this board, where we’ll allow people to say terrible things as long as they are sincere and use polite language while they say them. Which is rude, my entire post or my suggested manner of discussing an offensive concept? Either way, I don’t agree with the idea that political correctness is the same as politeness. Political correctness can descend into dishonesty and censorship when it extends beyong the concept of acceptable words, which it often does. I’m not disagreeing that a level of politeness should be used on the board though. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2013, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/147 "2013-04-21T00:20:42Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Which is rude, my entire post or my suggested manner of discussing an offensive concept? The latter: there is no polite way to tell someone that you think God is sending them to hell. Sometimes it’s worth it to be rude, but it’s definitely rude. > [@](#): > > Either way, I don’t agree with the idea that political correctness is the same as politeness. Can you give me an example on this board of polite behavior that’s condemned by political correctness? ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2013, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/148 "2013-04-21T01:00:18Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Can you give me an example on this board of polite behavior that’s condemned by political correctness? I’m not sure what you’re asking for. It doesn’t sound like something I said existed. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2013, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/149 "2013-04-21T01:22:00Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > Furthermore, I agree with **Oakminster** that courtesy to board participants directs that there should be an announcement in all Forums about how the moderation on this topic is being tightened. Even if it is not an official new rule, it is a new perspective and new enforcement. Quibbling over “it’s not a new rule” and “we’re not _required_ to” is poor form from **Marley23**. It looks like excuse mongering and whiny defensiveness. At a minimum, consider the tone of the responses if providing clarification, i.e. “We’re not creating a new rule, but yes, we are increasing scrutiny on sexist and mysoginistic comments via the “don’t be a jerk” rule,” rather than “[We didn’t make any new rules.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16211112&postcount=16)” Pssst: Irishman. The new policy is a work in progress. The mods aren’t sure where they’re going with this, so announcing a yet-to-be-conceived rule would be premature. Or so I gather, AFAIK, YMMV, blah blah. > [@Polycarp](#): > > Compare "Not only can she act, but she has a figure like a sex scene " and “Lookit the rack on that ho.” [hijack] Awkwardly, even complements tend to denigrate. Weird: I know: but that’s what the data indicates. Kevin Drum: > [@Kevin Drum](#): > > In the survey, Jane Smith and Dan Jones are pitted against each other in a race for Congress. Both have similar backgrounds, and after reading their bios the survey respondents prefer Jane slightly, 49-48. > > Then they read a second story. In one version of the story, there’s no physical description of either candidate, and Jane’s lead stays pretty much the same. In a second version, there’s a neutral description of Jane’s appearance. Suddenly she’s 5 points behind Dan. In a third version, there’s a positive description of her appearance. Now she’s 13 points behind Dan. A fourth version that contains a negative description has about the same effect. > > In other words, any description hurts Jane. And any non-neutral description, even a positive one, just kills her. … > > You will be unsurprised to learn that this effect is strongest among men. I think message board posting has a different context than the article linked. Which is why this is a hijack. [Here’s Why “Good Looking” Is Wrong and Damaging – Mother Jones](http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/04/heres-why-good-looking-wrong-and-damaging) [/hijack] ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2013, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/150 "2013-04-21T04:11:39Z")
Even though I was mentioned in the OP I can’t seem to be able to comment. The stupidity of this new unnamed rule has rendered me speechless. I usually comment on the small percentage of moderator decisions I disagree with but the overall quality of moderation is one of the things that keep me here. But if knee jerk reactions become the rule here I’ll have to rethink that. I know, I know, won’t be missed don’t let the door hit you on the way out… ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2013, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/151 "2013-04-21T18:26:53Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > That’s the exact issue here. You guys keep making the assumption that the thread was already sexual to begin with. > … > If anyone made a mistake, it was you guys for not saying what you wanted. > … > Not that those in the thread escape unscathed. You guys asked for clarification, didn’t get it, and then just stopped. > … > Was this moderation overdone? sure. But stop blaming them when you guys were the ones who were unclear. You’ve just used the phrase “you guys” four times in that comment, apparently referring to 4 different sets of people. I can’t tell who did what and who you’re blaming for what. > [@](#): > > You guys keep making the assumption that the thread was already sexual to begin with. But there is absolutely nothing sexual about the girl’s rant, unless you think using “fuck,” “suck,” and “cunt” automatically make something sexual. She advocated good PR for her sorority during Greek Week. She did it in a mockably stupid way, but it is horribly misogynistic to think “stupid girl” means “slut” or “whore.” I don’t think anyone is equating “stupid girl” with “slut” or “whore”. I don’t think it’s ridiculous to recognize that her poor choice of words undermines her message and makes her sound like she’s complaining that her sorority sisters are not getting frisky enough with the fraternity guys. Particularly when you consider other remarks from her twitter account. Like it or not, the use of sexual slang terms does bring sex into the discussion. Just because you don’t _mean_ for the sexual inuendo does not remove it. > [@](#): > > The general gist of the misogyny thread was that sexual jokes made about women in non-sexual topics counted as misogyny. So that’s the direction **Ellen** took. At no point did anyone say it should only be about posts directed at another poster. I would agree that a culture of mysogyny is not just about comments about other posters directly, and displaying attitudes about women in general should be considered. I don’t see that the specific remarks crossed that barrier. This thread was nothing like the context of someone asking medical advice and getting a booby joke. > [@](#): > > Particularly those of you like **Oakminster** who were here to see the thread but didn’t comment in it or possibly even read it. If you refuse to participate in ATMB, don’t go whining when things change in ways you don’t like. Bullshit. No one can read every thread and participate in every discussion. It’s one thing to see a topic in ATMB and decide not to participate, and then when an outcome is made you disagree with the result. Okay, you missed your opportunity to participate. But **Oakminster** ’s point was not that he didn’t get to affect the decision, his point was that he was unaware that a decision was even made. Policy changes, whether it is the creation of a new rule or it is the reinterpretation of an existing rule to cover a new situation, should be clearly expressed to all members rather than buried pages deep in a thread. > [@Baal Houtham](#): > > Again, all those words can be used so sexual meaning is beside the point. Using “cockblock” in a nonsexual way is edgier than using suck and cunt in nonsexual ways, but I don’t think Ms. Sorority Queen Bee was actually saying that her sisters were keeping the fraternity boys from having sex. She was just saying they were being “boners” and not keeping the party lively. But can you not see how her choice of terms makes it look like she’s bringing sex into the conversation? That her unintended double-entendres undermine her message? ---
**Author:** ![Uber\_the\_Goober](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/58956e/32.png) [@Uber\_the\_Goober](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uber_the_Goober)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2013, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/152 "2013-04-21T22:01:29Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I don’t see the satire in this example. > > I’ll let **Ellen Cherry** answer about how she would’ve handled it. But as someone who doesn’t watch that show and wouldn’t have gotten the reference, it would have looked like a stupid thing to say. I’m not one to throw in my two cents to an ATMB thread - But REALLY? After reading that filthy mouthed little tart’s profanity laden email - one of only a few appropriate responses would be “Bitches be crazy”… And if that type of commentary, about that type of topic, isn’t appropriate - then I’m happily inappropriate 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Baal\_Houtham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baal_houtham/32/13604_2.png) [@Baal\_Houtham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baal_Houtham)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2013, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/153 "2013-04-21T22:08:59Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > But can you not see how her choice of terms makes it look like she’s bringing sex into the conversation? That her unintended double-entendres undermine her message? Sure I can see how it looks like she’s bringing sex into the conversation. It’s a kick for people young and old (especially young) to throw sexual terms into non-sexual conversation. Fuck me running if it ain’t. And like any conversation, you have to bring in fresh material to keep things interesting, so the trendy kids might use cunt punt and (female) boner. My point in the post you’re quoting was that the diatribe was not actually sexual. And to me that’s what made **Happy Lendervedder** ’s remark somewhat witty: a confused reaction to vast helpings of sexual terms used gratuitously in a non-sexual context by a frighteningly self-assured woman. And directed at other women. I was saying that a sexual response would not have been entirely justified, but a confused response, yeah. Any titillation a male took from it would be unintentional on the writer’s part. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2013, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/154 "2013-04-21T22:25:58Z")
> [@Baal\_Houtham](#): > > I was saying that a sexual response would not have been entirely justified,… Why not? Why would any response be off-limits with that type of OP/thread? ---
**Author:** ![Baal\_Houtham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baal_houtham/32/13604_2.png) [@Baal\_Houtham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baal_Houtham)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2013, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/155 "2013-04-21T23:35:31Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > Why not? > > Why would any response be off-limits with that type of OP/thread? Answering that would involve some fine hair splitting and probably a reenactment of several very long recent threads. But I doubt that either the management here or the majority of posters believe “any of response” (totally without restriction) is appropriate for any thread. You may split hairs if you wish. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2013, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/156 "2013-04-22T16:15:00Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > (emphasis added) > > Well, right there’s an interesing example - **jtgain** ’s question includes an ironic use of slut-shaming language, which many consider an expression of social misogyny and by extension harmful to all women in the “creates a hostile environment” sense. Absent clarification of intent, it can be interpreted as done in all earnestness and thus an example of those who Don’t Get It, or it can be interpreted as done deliberately ironically in order to show up the disconnect in the discourse. It was a little bit of both. I do “get it” but don’t disagree with those who don’t “get it.” To believe that young women should conduct themselves in a responsible sexual manner (and so should men) is not an insult or a hatred against all women. So maybe I really don’t “get it” about the hostile environment stuff. If that same girl said that she smoked crack every morning before class and we said that was a bad thing, do the comments flow to all women? ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2013, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/157 "2013-04-22T16:42:00Z")
> [@Baal\_Houtham](#): > > I was saying that a sexual response would not have been entirely justified, but a confused response, yeah. Any titillation a male took from it would be unintentional on the writer’s part. You seem to be saying that the comments by **April R** and **Happy Lendervedder** were inappropriate for that thread. If that is not what you are saying, then please clarify, because my response is with respect to those comments, not what the lady meant with her statements. It’s very likely she did not mean “you girls should be blowing our frat bro guests”, that what she meant was that they should be actually talking to the guests, not ignoring them, or worse, talking about hanging out with other guys in front of them. And that is certainly a valid point. But her choice of words provoked a misinterpretive remark for humor value. That says nothing about women in general or even casting all sorority members as bad. It just points out an unintended double entendre. And that is the point that **billfish678** was making to **BigT**. It doesn’t matter that the girl’s remarks were not intended to be sexual. What matters is that the choice of words combined with the message in such a way as to invite the sexual allusion. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2013, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/158 "2013-04-23T03:45:23Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > How does [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16212837&postcount=4) figure into the “paradigm shift”? Or [this one from the sorority girl thread?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16211505&postcount=71) I’d still like an answer to this… ---
**Author:** ![April\_R](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3da27b/32.png) [@April\_R](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/April_R)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2013, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/159 "2013-04-23T03:47:02Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > I’d still like an answer to this… me too. Why wasn’t that remark about sororities being training grounds for hos moderated? ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2013, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134/160 "2013-04-23T04:05:32Z")
> [@April\_R](#): > > me too. Why wasn’t that remark about sororities being training grounds for hos moderated? If you are referring to this remark of mine: > [@Sorority girl's warning letter to sisters goes viral - It's epic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorority-girls-warning-letter-to-sisters-goes-viral-its-epic/656104/71): > > Sorority members are definitely not hos. They’re just in occupational training so they will know _how to be_ hos. Huge difference. It was not a misogynistic remark, nor a claim of fact about sororities, nor a defamatory statement about sororities. It was a sarcastic but logical inference following this series of remarks: > [@Sorority girl's warning letter to sisters goes viral - It's epic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorority-girls-warning-letter-to-sisters-goes-viral-its-epic/656104/63): > > Well there’s another subtext and that is if you expect to be successful professionals in your adult life and profession you need to be on point with your message and image. People behaving like a herd of stray cats when the organization is trying to focus on achieving some PR goal makes everyone look bad. > > If you don’t want to be in a sorority that’s fine but part of the package is agreeing to the group goals set by the leadership. Doing what you want and what’s most fun is not always going to align with the larger goals of the organization. If that’s not something these young women can “get” would you really want them representing your company or organization? > > “No one’s the boss of me” works until you actually have a boss. > > The email is over the top but the point of working cooperatively and not embarrassing the chapter with poor or self indulgent behavior is a life lesson anyone who is going to work effectively in a group has to learn. > [@Sorority girl's warning letter to sisters goes viral - It's epic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorority-girls-warning-letter-to-sisters-goes-viral-its-epic/656104/67): > > Wait, people join sororities in order to learn how to take orders from their bosses? Was that in the flyer? > > And then there’s the fact that the “group goal” that the sisters are being dedicated to is “being sexually submissive to a randomly chosen group of men.” > > God knows that our employers today can’t find enough job applicants with that skill. Whatever happened to the Protestant work ethic? > [@Sorority girl's warning letter to sisters goes viral - It's epic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorority-girls-warning-letter-to-sisters-goes-viral-its-epic/656104/69): > > It’s now the Prostitute work ethic. Thus, my conclusion about sororities being a training ground for prostitution was ridiculing the argument that the rant represented some kind of furthering of a legitimate and admirable purpose of sororities. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-an-off-topic-comment/656134.md?page=9)