# Why are threads like this in GD not shut down or moved to IMHO?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273
**Category:** About This Message Board
**Created:** [February 27, 2016, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273 "2016-02-27T05:57:47Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)
#### Post date: [February 27, 2016, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/1 "2016-02-27T05:57:47Z")
[This thread.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=785217)
It’s pretty common for contentless OPs in GD to be shut down or move to IMHO or MPSIMS. It’s done all the time. What is it about that thread that make it immune to such mod action? Is that really what we want GD to be? I mean, this isn’t even a link, it’s just a quote for some unlinked to site with the OP just asking questions.
---
### Author:  [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/2 "2016-02-28T00:01:10Z")
Not a mod, but IMO, there is a valid debatable question in there. Admittedly, the OP probably should have linked to the actual quote, to give more context and explain what “joined the bandwagon of destruction” is supposed to mean - destruction of what? Also, just asking “True or false?” isn’t really a debate question. As such, I could see IMHO as a valid venue.
Of course, the posters in that thread can take it to debate territory by reframing the issues, advocating one or the other position. I haven’t read the whole thread yet, just the first few posts, but I probably will.
---
### Author:  [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/3 "2016-02-28T00:14:19Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#):
>
> [This thread.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=785217)
>
> It’s pretty common for contentless OPs in GD to be shut down or move to IMHO or MPSIMS. It’s done all the time. What is it about that thread that make it immune to such mod action? Is that really what we want GD to be? I mean, **this isn’t even a link, it’s just a quote for some unlinked to site with the OP just asking questions.**
That’s just it–it IS a quote, rather than just “Hey, guys, what do you think about this?” They keep closing or moving threads that are just linking drive-bys, saying we have to include at least a little something to make people think we care. The OP did this, so it’d be kind of crass for it to be summarily closed or moved.
---
### Author:  [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/4 "2016-02-28T00:29:42Z")
> [@Irishman](#):
>
> Not a mod, but IMO, there is a valid debatable question in there.
> …
> Of course, the posters in that thread can take it to debate territory by reframing the issues, advocating one or the other position. I haven’t read the whole thread yet, just the first few posts, but I probably will.
Oh, you should read it. There’s some very valuable debate going on there:
> [@Scott Adams says... (Hillary & feminism)](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scott-adams-says-hillary-feminism/747187/47):
>
> If a Hillary want the voters to vote for her on account of her pussy, the least she could do was to put out. Like Hillary could promise she’d institute a national lottery, and let, say, 10,000 random winners fuck her over the course of her presidency. That way the voters could get some actual benefit from having pussy in the White House, rather than just a person.
I’m not sure I can blame the OP for that, but I’m not sure I can’t, either.
---
### Author:  [@Sunny\_Daze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunny_Daze)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/5 "2016-02-28T01:43:44Z")
I (clearly, see the thread - heck see the last one too) think that it would be spiffy if **LinusK** would take a position in GD, rather than JAQing. This one was true or false. There was also the thread that started with him asking what we thought of some clips of young women talking about feminism.
Not sure why these aren’t IMHO threads, if he’s just soliciting opinions.
---
### Author:  [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/6 "2016-02-28T04:13:09Z")
I don’t know how that thread should be moderated, but I can say it was a terribly written OP. Just Asking Questions yanks the board’s chain.
Bad form. Terrible way of fighting ignorance. A textbook case really. Needs improvement.
The OP should have provided a link. Best practice would have involved elaboration, argument for, argument against and the OP’s take on the matter.
ETA: Should such threads be moved to a special forum or maybe another message board? I’m not advocating that, I’m Just Asking Questions.
---
### Author:  [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 7:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/7 "2016-02-28T07:39:23Z")
A quote plus “what do you think” has no more content than a link withthe same question. I think they should be treated the same.
It is also my understanding of GD rules that the OP must take a position, even if that position is unsure, rather than just ask what everyone else thinks. I remember actually getting into an argument about this when I first got here.
---
### Author:  [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/8 "2016-02-28T07:55:39Z")
If I’d noticed that thread earlier, I’d have reported it for being a crappy OP.
---
### Author:  [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/9 "2016-02-28T15:14:00Z")
I suppose the thinking is that “a debate might emerge”. Well, monkey “might emerge” from my ass, too. Seems to me very simple-- if you want to set some standards for OPs in GD, you have to enforce those standards. If you don’t, you re-enforce ignoring those standards. I would think a minimum standard for an OP in GD (non-witnessing, that is) should be:
1. State what the debate is.
2. Offer some position that you take.
3. Offer some evidence for the position you take.
It needn’t be a Five Paragraph Expository Essay (wrote enough of those in HS English class). The above could be accomplished with as little as 3 sentences.
Offered for debate here: Should we have some minimum standards for an OP in GD, else it gets booted to IMHO? It’s not like you’d be condemning the OP to hell or anything…
---
### Author:  [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/10 "2016-02-28T19:11:34Z")
The thread was posted in the early morning. By the time I had a chance to see it, later that night, there was an actual discussion going. Had I seen it when it was first posted or even when there were only a few low content responses, I would very likely have closed it. However, once posters insisted on contributing to it, I let it go.
---
### Author:  [@Sunny\_Daze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunny_Daze)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/11 "2016-02-28T19:34:34Z")
**tomndebb** your response is reasonable. We do seem unable to help ourselves. I would argue though that nothing is really being debated in that thread. It still seems very MPSIMS, with a side of 2 warnings and counting.
A follow up question would be: if a poster has a history of doing this, should that be considered?
---
### Author:  [@Reluctant\_A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reluctant_A)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/12 "2016-02-28T20:41:15Z")
On a somewhat related topic, I have a question about [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=785399) thread. Now, I want to be clear that I’m not advocating that thread be reopened, or anything, but I am curious as to the chronology related to the closing. As near as I can tell, the thread originated in #Elections and, at some point, **Johnathan Chance** moved it to #IMHO. Some eight hours later, **tomndebb** made the following remarks before locking the thread:
> [@](#):
>
> This is not an Elections discussion and I really can’t figure out where it goes. (We don’t really have a prurient interest forum.)
>
> Closed.
… Which is fine, except for the fact that it doesn’t appear that thread was _in_ #Elections when it was closed. As the great American philosopher Gregory Helms might say, wasupwitdat?
---
### Author:  [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/13 "2016-02-28T20:47:14Z")
> [@Reluctant\_A](#):
>
> On a somewhat related topic, I have a question about [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=785399) thread. Now, I want to be clear that I’m not advocating that thread be reopened, or anything, but I am curious as to the chronology related to the closing. As near as I can tell, the thread originated in #Elections and, at some point, **Johnathan Chance** moved it to #IMHO. Some eight hours later, **tomndebb** made the following remarks before locking the thread:
>
> … Which is fine, except for the fact that it doesn’t appear that thread was _in_ #Elections when it was closed. As the great American philosopher Gregory Helms might say, wasupwitdat?
It was in my mailbox as a reported thread. I looked it over without noticing that it was no longer in Elections. I closed it. When the Closed message came back, I noticed that it was in IMHO, but I didn’t think it was worth the effort to re-open it.
---
### Author:  [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/14 "2016-02-28T21:53:46Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#):
>
> I suppose the thinking is that “a debate might emerge”. Well, monkey “might emerge” from my ass, too. Seems to me very simple-- if you want to set some standards for OPs in GD, you have to enforce those standards. If you don’t, you re-enforce ignoring those standards. I would think a minimum standard for an OP in GD (non-witnessing, that is) should be:
>
> 1. State what the debate is.
> 2. Offer some position that you take.
> 3. Offer some evidence for the position you take.
>
> It needn’t be a Five Paragraph Expository Essay (wrote enough of those in HS English class). The above could be accomplished with as little as 3 sentences.
>
> Offered for debate here: Should we have some minimum standards for an OP in GD, else it gets booted to IMHO? It’s not like you’d be condemning the OP to hell or anything…
Moderator sanction is one option, but so are other tools.
Counter plan: provide guidance in a sticky.
**GD: What we’re about**
Great Debates is for topics that, unlike General Questions, lack a clear answer. Here are some things that make up a better original post in Great Debates:
1. State what the debate is.
2. Offer some position that you take.
3. Offer some evidence for the position you take.
4. Don’t be afraid to present, evaluate and weigh conflicting evidence. Embrace the controversy rather than ignoring points inconvenient to your position.
The above are guidelines: exceptions to the above include religious witnessing.
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/15 "2016-02-28T22:49:46Z")
Does anyone else find it ironic that the OP of this thread didn’t actually say which thread he was talking about, just a link to it?
---
### Author:  [@Sunny\_Daze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunny_Daze)
#### Post date: [February 28, 2016, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/16 "2016-02-28T22:55:47Z")
No, but I knew what he was talking about, so I glossed right over it. On the other hand, this isn’t GD.
I will agree that a well rounded OP is a good thing for everyone.
---
### Author:  [@Reluctant\_A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reluctant_A)
#### Post date: [February 29, 2016, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/17 "2016-02-29T00:10:28Z")
> [@tomndebb](#):
>
> It was in my mailbox as a reported thread. I looked it over without noticing that it was no longer in Elections.
Is that a common practice?
---
### Author:  [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)
#### Post date: [February 29, 2016, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/18 "2016-02-29T03:06:16Z")
> [@Chronos](#):
>
> Does anyone else find it ironic that the OP of this thread didn’t actually say which thread he was talking about, just a link to it?
No.
---
### Author:  [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)
#### Post date: [February 29, 2016, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/19 "2016-02-29T03:34:03Z")
> [@Reluctant\_A](#):
>
> Is that a common practice?
Is what a common practice?
We get reports as emails that include the link to the thread/post being reported. We only get reports from our the forums we moderate. When you click on the link it takes you to the post that was reported. Assuming you got a report because it was in your forum is reasonable, and it’s not always obvious that the forum changed. Checking reports on your phone makes it even trickier.
---
### Author:  [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)
#### Post date: [February 29, 2016, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273/20 "2016-02-29T15:53:28Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#):
>
> Is what a common practice?
>
> We get reports as emails that include the link to the thread/post being reported. We only get reports from our the forums we moderate. When you click on the link it takes you to the post that was reported. Assuming you got a report because it was in your forum is reasonable, and it’s not always obvious that the forum changed. Checking reports on your phone makes it even trickier.
So re-open it if it was a mistake. Was it violating any rules? It is obviously IMHO stuff.
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-threads-like-this-in-gd-not-shut-down-or-moved-to-imho/747273.md?page=2)