# Why Was This Thread Closed? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [October 8, 2009, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002 "2009-10-08T01:12:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/41 "2009-10-08T18:55:20Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > That is not the point. The point is you asked how to make crack. Making crack is illegal, and threads about how to make crack will be locked here. It doesn’t matter whether a mod calls it “encouragement” and I call it “ice cream”. It’s \*my \*point, whether you dismiss it or not. And your apparent inability to provide the requested definition is noted. I understand that the mods can do anything they want. But once a justification is offered, it becomes a topic of discussion. And if they can declare by fiat that “encouragement” is “ice cream,” then they can declare by fiat that extolling the virtues of child molesting is against the rules as well. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/42 "2009-10-08T19:03:14Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > I understand that the mods can do anything they want. But once a justification is offered, it becomes a topic of discussion. And if they can declare by fiat that “encouragement” is “ice cream,” then they can declare by fiat that extolling the virtues of child molesting is against the rules as well. You are not being reasonable here. You’re pushing a semantic point that doesn’t matter, over a thread you don’t care about, to make a point about a completely different issue. Worse, your allegedl point in this thread is silly. You know what the rule means. You know why the thread was locked. What you want is for some mod to either ban the pedo guy, or at least show up and let you chew his ass out for not banning the pedo-guy. I fail to see how that goal is furthered in this thread. But hey, if that’s what you want to do, carry on then. I’m not a mod here. Will miss you if you end up getting suspended or banned over it, though. You don’t seem like a bad guy or anything, just got this wild hair in your ass today for some reason. ---
**Author:** ![InkBlot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b5e925/32.png) [@InkBlot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/InkBlot)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/43 "2009-10-08T19:21:52Z")
Yeesh…you make this so difficult. OK, you’re a person thinking about _X_. I’m a person not thinking about _X_. I go along my little life, happily not thinking about X until I come to the boards here to find your post: “Hey, I know _X_ isn’t legal, but I think it ought to be. And if it were, how might I make some _X_?” Two topics here. Ought _X_ be legal? How might one make _X_? Your post has encouraged me to think on these two topics. Someone else comes along, and tells you, “hey, I agree with you! _X_ ought to be legal. And if it were, you could make it like this: (blah).” Now I might start thinking, hey, _X_ sounds pretty cool…and look, it’s easy to make. I could probably do that in my garage! I’ll go try this, just not tell anyone… Now, you’ll say, “but I didn’t encourage you! I said upfront, it’s illegal and I won’t touch _X_ until _X_ is legal.” But that’s topic number 1, and we can talk all day about topic number 1 without reaching topic number 2, which is _X_ is something I can make myself. You’ve brought that skill up, put that skill in my head, in potentia. And what’s your guidance on it? "Well, it’s illegal so you shouldn’t…but what if? What if. It’s what SDMB is about. Answering the what ifs. So yeah, I see a difference between the concepts of \*legal \*or \*illegal \*behaviors, and the _actual skills_ of performing those behaviors. One encourages a person to think about the laws of their society and how to embrace or change them, the other encourages another to think about how to actually perform an illegal activity. At some point, that thinking might lead to acting. And you can’t stop it, and I can’t stop it, and no one on the board can stop it. What we can do is decide what we’re going to encourage each other to think about. So, now do you see a difference between thinking about whether _X_ is legal, and how to actually do _X_? ---
**Author:** ![spinky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@spinky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spinky)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/44 "2009-10-08T19:24:18Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > The justification given was that I agreed not to encourage an illegal act. Give it up, dude. You may have “won” that tiny semantic battle – it can be argued that you are not strictly “encouraging” an illegal act – but you were **also** given another very clear justification for your thread closing: you are not allowed to ask for advice on how to commit an illegal act. Period. We all see what you’re trying to do. You’re trying to point out an inconsistency in the application of the rules so they’ll realize they should shut **Cesario** down. A noble goal, in my opinion. But you have failed so far and clinging to the “encouraging” aspect ignores a larger, less subjective rule, plus it’s an annoying nitpick of an argument that is pissing off the people whose minds you’re trying to change. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/45 "2009-10-08T19:25:26Z")
> [@InkBlot](#): > > What we can do is decide what we’re going to encourage each other to think about. So, now do you see a difference between thinking about whether _X_ is legal, and how to actually do _X_? For the sake of the argument, I’ll accept your premise. Under those conditions, is extolling the virtues of X encouragement to do X? ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/46 "2009-10-08T19:29:40Z")
You’ve gotten an answer to your question of why the thread was locked. If you want to debate about what the nature of “encouragement” is, perhaps you should start a thread in GD, since that seems like a philosophical issue to me. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/47 "2009-10-08T19:32:20Z")
> [@InkBlot](#): > > Yeesh…you make this so difficult. > > OK, you’re a person thinking about _X_. I’m a person not thinking about _X_. > > I go along my little life, happily not thinking about X until I come to the boards here to find your post: “Hey, I know _X_ isn’t legal, but I think it ought to be. And if it were, how might I make some _X_?” > > Two topics here. Ought _X_ be legal? How might one make _X_? Your post has encouraged me to think on these two topics. > > Someone else comes along, and tells you, “hey, I agree with you! _X_ ought to be legal. And if it were, you could make it like this: (blah).” > > Now I might start thinking, hey, _X_ sounds pretty cool…and look, it’s easy to make. I could probably do that in my garage! I’ll go try this, just not tell anyone… > > Now, you’ll say, “but I didn’t encourage you! I said upfront, it’s illegal and I won’t touch _X_ until _X_ is legal.” But that’s topic number 1, and we can talk all day about topic number 1 without reaching topic number 2 “Yeesh” is right. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/48 "2009-10-08T19:36:53Z")
> [@twickster](#): > > You’ve gotten an answer to your question of why the thread was locked. > > If you want to debate about what the nature of “encouragement” is, perhaps you should start a thread in GD, since that seems like a philosophical issue to me. The answer is unsatisfactory. I want clarification on what “encouragement” is with respect to the linked SDMB rule. Care to give it a shot? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/49 "2009-10-08T19:40:27Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > For the sake of the argument, I’ll accept your premise. Under those conditions, is extolling the virtues of X encouragement to do X? I don’t want to go over **Cesario** ’s posts any more than I already have, but I don’t think he’s extolled the virtues of sex with children, and he hasn’t encouraged anyone to abuse children, etc. He’s said he wants to do it and said he would like to be allowed to do it. ---
**Author:** ![InkBlot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b5e925/32.png) [@InkBlot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/InkBlot)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/50 "2009-10-08T19:48:28Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > For the sake of the argument, I’ll accept your premise. Under those conditions, is extolling the virtues of X encouragement to do X? Here, you present it as an end. In your original thread, it was a means - the virtues of _X_ justifying changing the legal status of _X_. In that, you’re encouraging a change in the legal status of _X_. If you show up to simply extoll the virtues of _X_, well, it’s proselytizing. There, your goals are more ambiguous and it’s more likely the administration will consider that encouragement to do _X_. And no matter how hard you try to frame your argument, the board will move as it will, and your thread might get away from you and still wind up closed. But it’s still important to frame your argument carefully, because that’s what the administration will have to judge your status as a poster. And from what little I understand of another poster who advocates for illegal activity _Y_, he’s been very careful in how he frames his arguments. So far. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/51 "2009-10-08T19:49:35Z")
Also from the rules: “We reserve the right to ask you to limit postings on a particular topic, or to refrain from posting on such topics altogether.” Sounds like you will just have to go without crack ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/52 "2009-10-08T19:50:30Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I don’t want to go over **Cesario** ’s posts any more than I already have, but I don’t think he’s extolled the virtues of sex with children, and he hasn’t encouraged anyone to abuse children, etc. He’s said he wants to do it and said he would like to be allowed to do it. This seems like a nice summary: > [@Cesario, you're awfully sanctimonious for a pedophile](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/587): > > Funny how a lot of us are managing just fine to have an interesting discussion with him, including the part where he said that he DOESN’T want to have sex with anyone who can’t consent (as defined by a psych exam, and not a legal bright line) and he’ll live with it if it turns out that there are no people he’s attracted to who can pass a test proving their ability to consent. > > And he’s not arguing that “he should be allowed to molest children”, he’s arguing that the state should redefine the law to potentially allow younger people to prove they’re in possession of adult decision-making and reasoning skills. There’s nothing wrong with what he’s actually advocating in this regard, unless you believe that 100% of people are unable to make said decisions until 18 AND you believe that some portion of people could fraudulently pass the test anyway. > > Having actually read his proposal, it’s probably a pipe dream for him as I doubt anyone under 14ish could pass it, and I probably couldn’t have passed it at 20. ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/53 "2009-10-08T19:52:13Z")
We don’t need to go the “encouraging” route. From the rules for posting at the SDMB: > [@FAQ - Rules for Posting at the Straight Dope Message Boards](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faq-rules-for-posting-at-the-straight-dope-message-boards/369395/5): > > You are allowed discussion on almost any topic, but…Note that the [Registration Agreement](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=347160) prohibits: > Specifically: > > **Drugs that are illegal in the US:** You may discuss the effects of drugs, but not where to obtain them. “How to manufacture” is effectively “where to obtain.” Thus any discussion of “how to manufacture” is forbidden. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/54 "2009-10-08T19:52:29Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I don’t want to go over **Cesario** ’s posts any more than I already have, but I don’t think he’s extolled the virtues of sex with children, and he hasn’t encouraged anyone to abuse children, etc. He’s said he wants to do it and said he would like to be allowed to do it. He has said that people should be allowed to do it. He has said that it is the right thing to do with respect to “youth sufferage.” So, perhaps not the virtues of molestation _per se_, but that the virtuous thing to do would be to allow it. At any rate, how is that \*not \*encouragement, if asking for advice \*is \*encouragement? If i asked you how to build a doghouse, do you seriously believe that the is my way of encouraging you to do so? ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/55 "2009-10-08T19:53:33Z")
> [@twickster](#): > > We don’t need to go the “encouraging” route. > > From the rules for posting at the SDMB: > > “How to manufacture” is effectively “where to obtain.” > > Thus any discussion of “how to manufacture” is forbidden. Thank you. So the citation concerning “encouragement” was incorrect? ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/56 "2009-10-08T19:55:36Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > Also from the rules: > “We reserve the right to ask you to limit postings on a particular topic, or to refrain from posting on such topics altogether.” > > Sounds like you will just have to go without crack ☹ Well. Interesting. I wonder where else that rule might be applied …? ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/57 "2009-10-08T19:57:05Z")
I’m not going to go there. You wanted a reason why the thread was closed, you’ve got one. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/58 "2009-10-08T19:58:34Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > Well. Interesting. I wonder where else that rule might be applied …? Doesn’t matter because you didn’t ask the question you should have. You wasted a thread beating the wrong horse. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/59 "2009-10-08T19:59:45Z")
> [@twickster](#): > > I’m not going to go there. Clearly, as will no other moderator or administrator. And it seems like such a simple question. > [@](#): > > You wanted a reason why the thread was closed, you’ve got one. 50 posts in. And after playing prevent defense for two days. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2009, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002/60 "2009-10-08T20:01:04Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > Doesn’t matter because you didn’t ask the question you should have. You wasted a thread beating the wrong horse. So? Why does that make it not matter? It’s either a valid question or it isn’t. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-this-thread-closed/513002.md?page=4)