It’s more like pro-choicers being in favor of abortions being provided by an actual medical doctor.
That’s a reasonable rule, reasonable people like reasonable rules.
Is the idea that felons can’t buy guns a reasonable rule, or a bullshit rule?
To follow my previous post: It would be like someone starting a Positive Abortion News thread and then the thread only allowed to be about pro-life views. When anyone wants to challenge the opinion that this is “positive news”, they get warned for threadshitting even tho the title of the thread itself is trolling.
ETA: Keep the thread but change the title to “Pro-Gun News” or something more accurately descriptive, IMO.
About fifty people have already said this, but you’re being deliberately obtuse. Stop feigning innocence and just cut that shit out. You’re not even remotely close to fooling anyone.
You are threadshitting in my thread. Knock it off.
No I’m not, and no I won’t.
As Shodan pointed out, if you really can’t figure out what’s meant by ‘Positive Gun News’ in the context of the never ending gun debates on this board, that’s your problem. No-one else seems to have had any trouble figuring it out, so if it’s truly got you stumped then you should just stay out of it.
Of course, I’m giving you a little more credit than that, which is why I think you’re being deliberately obtuse. It’s annoying, and, as I said, you’re fooling absolutely no-one.
I’m just chiming in one last time to say that I have no issue with the moderation of the Positive Gun News thread. In the same vein, I have no problem with the newly minted Positive Gun Control thread. I will probably read both. I am also mature enough to figure out what type comment would be a thread shit in either and will refrain from posting such. YMMV.
There has been a longstanding tongue-in-cheek joke about how gun control means “use both hands.” If someone were to post that in a Positive Gun Control thread, they would rightfully be accused of sidetracking it.
It’s not only that. I posted a news item that seemed positive to me all around. It wasn’t a “gun control” post, but a celebration of guns being used in a positive manner. And I STILL got a warning. There’s no rhyme or reason to that thread, except to run your posts by Bone or another moderator before you can post them in that thread.
There’s a certain amount of irony inherent in this post.
You’re free to discuss the pros and cons of gun control as much as you want. There are numerous existing threads on this topic but you can start a new one if you feel there is some aspect of the debate that isn’t being covered.
But you can’t go to a thread about “Anyone have a good recipe for salmon?” and start posting about gun control. It’s not the topic of the thread.
And, as many people have pointed out to you, it’s also not the topic of a thread about positive gun news.
For the curious, this was the post in question that earned manson that warning:
The warning, obviously, was for trolling. In the ATMB thread you started about it, manson, you got some good and still highly relevant advice from Colibri:
This thread reminds me of my college days when I used to Dungeon Master for a group of RPG enthusiasts. I had a coterie of neckbeards to deal with who would tediously ruleslawyer an entire evening away trying to get their way on something they had already been told not to do. All that is missing is the smell of BO and Doritos.
If something is obvious, then it is easy to explain. I suggest doing so. A threat may silence someone, but it will not convince them.
manson has every right to disagree with any moderation on this board. He should be able to do so without any moderator threatening him, as what he is doing is not against the rules.
On the SDMB, posters are allowed to disagree with the mods. Threats are not called for when they do so.
And as many other people have pointed out, this is not inherently true. If the post is about news that is related to guns and is positive, then it would go in a thread called “positive gun news.”
What is unusual here is not that the mods are keeping the thread on topic. It is that the mods have decided that one side of a contentious issue gets to define what the topic means. Positive gun news inherently means what it means to gun control opponents, not what it means to gun control advocates.
The mods have decided that “positive gun news” has one and only one possible meaning, and will attack people as trolling or at least “disingenuous” if they disagree.
I argue that both “Bad guy killed by a gun” and “gun user stopped by someone not using a gun” both count as positive gun news.
So what do you think the policy should be? Every poster should be allowed to define the topic of a thread as they wish? That seems likely to be abused by people who are obsessed by a particular topic and try to swing the conversation in every thread around to a discussion of the pet issue.
I think it’s better to have a small group of people who are designated by the administration of this message board to monitor threads and make decisions about issues like what’s on topic in a thread. Which is the system we have.
It should just be renamed “The Pro-Gun Cheerleading Thread” and left at that.
OP should receive a warning for arguing in bad faith, let me be the umpteenth person to use the word “disingenuous” in this thread.
I don’t know if I’d call it an embarrassment, but I will say this. I wish I could have the level of “safe space” protection for my recent thread about concentration camps. Instead, we had a level of trolling that leaves Fear Itself’s statements about gun control in the dust (and yes, I did in fact report it, and I’m pretty sure I DM’d some mods about it too, nobody cared), and it continued until page 14 (with no warning issued). This despite the fact that I set out the parameters of the discussion in far greater detail than Bone did in his “positive gun news” thread:
This went almost completely ignored. Which, at the time, I was disappointed about, but hey - it happens. Threads here aren’t safe spaces, and telling people “please don’t disagree in this thread about issue X” isn’t something we generally do here.
Except now I see that we absolutely do that here. With certain subjects. :rolleyes:
Is it significant that the thread in question was started by a Mod? “Some animals are more equal than others”, kind of thing.
Nothing gets by you.