# Why is this "Great Debate" not Pit worthy **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [April 18, 2005, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-this-great-debate-not-pit-worthy/299935 "2005-04-18T19:52:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![jimmmy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/73ab20/32.png) [@jimmmy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jimmmy)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2005, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-this-great-debate-not-pit-worthy/299935/1 "2005-04-18T19:52:16Z")
1000 something posts and I still don’t get it. I know I am d-u-m-b-e So having said that, I don’t get why is this thread has been allowed to stay in Great Debates +24 hours. It is a thread that calls an esteemed SDMB longtime member out for his words on another thread – why is it being allowed to stay in GD and not being moved to the Pit? > **[Polycarp does not tolerate homosexuality,](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=312374)** > > and I do not tolerate Parminder Nagra. This is not a new idea, but it needs repeating. In this thread, SCCajun and Theologue are pretty undeniably civil and indeed quite friendly. Nonetheless, they are criticised by Case Sensitive and elanorigby. ... The rules clearly state that calling someone a “Putz” in GD is banned, yet this seems much worse esp. given the member’s explanation and history. I don’t begrudge the Posters right to say something or call a fellow doper out – I just don’t get why its a GD … do I take the position “No I don’t think the Doper was saying that all, I think he meant …” I guess I am bugged by the thread title and am reacting to it – but I truly don’t understand what the mods are thinking leaving it there: (sincerely) Please enlighten me. ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2005, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-this-great-debate-not-pit-worthy/299935/2 "2005-04-18T20:04:56Z")
You’ll probably get faster action if you hit “REPORT THIS POST” (the little exclamation point in the red triangle in the upper right corner of each post. That way, the GD mods will have their attention drawn to your complaint. By posting instead, the people who see the complaint are likely to be mods who don’t interfere much in GD. If you have hit the REPORT THIS POST button, then … I dunno. I’ll look into it. But if the GD mods have made a decision, I’m not going to try to out-guess them. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2005, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-this-great-debate-not-pit-worthy/299935/3 "2005-04-18T20:12:35Z")
Maybe it’s because he isn’t calling **Polycarp** out, so much as using his position as the starting point of a debate. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2005, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-this-great-debate-not-pit-worthy/299935/4 "2005-04-18T20:24:52Z")
He was using his impression of my stance to make a point about terminology. It’s a bizarre thread from the get-go, but not a Pitting of me. ---
**Author:** ![Lobsang](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobsang/32/4067_2.png) [@Lobsang](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobsang)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2005, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-this-great-debate-not-pit-worthy/299935/5 "2005-04-18T20:42:38Z")
Tolerate: Put up with: Necesary evil. Polycarp doesn’t consider homosexuals evil. That’s the basic logic of the GD thread. ---
**Author:** ![jimmmy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/73ab20/32.png) [@jimmmy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jimmmy)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2005, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-this-great-debate-not-pit-worthy/299935/6 "2005-04-18T21:39:48Z")
Thanks – was Definitely NOT trying to second guess a mod as I am **tota** l coward that way I did understand what furt was saying… still can I start a thread (In GD) _CDexter Haven doesn’t second guess even when he sees it as wrong_ and start a debate about when and when not to second guess mods or _Lobsang OK with debating homosexuality as evil._ and start a debate about whether it is homphobic to entertain the question I don’t want to push this (I am a coward \*\*THAT \*\* way too) I just am surprised. So no one has a problem with it and sees it as an OK if odd way to start a GD? I, am surprised by that - but i get it (kinda) Thanks all. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2005, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-this-great-debate-not-pit-worthy/299935/7 "2005-04-18T22:26:42Z")
> [@jimmmy](#): > > So no one has a problem with it and sees it as an OK if odd way to start a GD? I, am surprised by that - but i get it (kinda) Thanks all. I don’t read it as in any way being a criticism of **Polycarp**. In fact, it could be read as a compliment. It’s somewhat of an odd way to define “tolerance,” but I suppose that’s the debate. If you see nothing wrong with something, then you can’t be considered to be “tolerant” of it. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2005, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-this-great-debate-not-pit-worthy/299935/8 "2005-04-18T22:34:34Z")
If someone begins to make a habit of titling **GD** threads using language that suggests a Pitting, we’ll probably address that issue. Given that this is a single thread that does explain (if circuitously) its point of debate in the OP and is genuinely not a **Pit** thread, we’re not going to mess with it. (Do you _really_ want us to begin formulating rules as to the express manner of titling each thread in each Forum?) GD Moderator ---
**Author:** ![Lobsang](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobsang/32/4067_2.png) [@Lobsang](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobsang)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2005, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-this-great-debate-not-pit-worthy/299935/9 "2005-04-18T22:34:56Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > If you see nothing wrong with something, then you can’t be considered to be “tolerant” of it. So people who say they are ‘very tolerant’ see everything as wrong? I don’t mean to contradict you, you are right. But my question points out the problem. Many people percieve ‘tolerant’ as positive.