Then it doesn't really have anything to do with why people read 2+2.

Let's be clear. If you moderated the forums for the Mayo Clinic, you would allow posters to tout the benefits of colloidal silver or ear candling on the theory that people don't need to be treated like kindergartners.

Idk. Is the science on colloidal silver and ear candling as "settled" as the science on covid and the vaccines?

Also, the Mayo clinic forums would actually be a place where people would be going for medical advise, not a poker forum. Can you see how there might be a difference there?

*I don't know what "ear candling" is fwiw.

Do you really care how "settled" the science is?

I'm not suggesting that you believe in every form of quackery. But someone does, and for moderation purposes, I would have thought that would be good enough for you.

It's a catchy way of describing the bill in a way that is close enough.

From the article you linked:

The nickname is not literally true in that the word "gay" does not appear in the text but the basic gist that the purpose of the bill is to try and stifle discussion about homosexuality is true. The conservatives complaining about it in that article are really just being whiny children who are upset that the other side came up with an effective messaging tactic. That's just politics. Republicans in Florida are trying to make a superficial argument with a complaint about a literal, narrow interpretation of "don't say gay", while trying to avoid any substantive discussion of the bill's potential effects.

I may have to rename it.

For anyone interested there is a great example of a civil, respectful political discussion going on in the low content thread starting at post 11. I think I'm going to cry.

I did rename and repurpose the low content thread. Now in addition to the usual low content and chit chat posts, if a discussion develops in a thread that is off topic or wandering between various topics I may move it there and let it go in whatever direction it flows.

It looks to me that not only is "don't say gay" accurate, but so is "don't say girl". Just using the words girl or boy would mean discussing gender identity. I hope someone takes a conservative teacher to court for using those terrible words.

Referring to a student as "girl" is no more "discussing gender identity" than telling that student to be careful not to drop their snack on the floor is "discussing gravity."

Any thread can start nice. It's how they end up that you'll be judged on- and you're fighting Godwin's law there.

Actually, it's been nice for over 30 posts. That might be a new record for this forum.

How is that new thread different than the "In Other News" thread?
Is it only going to be for the moderator to move discussions into?

Anyone can make posts in the hi-lo thread. I'll move posts when I think it helps. The current discussion I moved from the mod thread. The discussion started with a response to a single post. Then it expanded from there into a good back and forth of several posts. But not moderation related so it clogs a thread design to ID mod issues.

I'll take another look at the in the news thread. My understanding it was set up to discuss items hitting the news. There may be some overlap for now so I'll look and see how people use each one.

I just want to say to browser I know your time here might not be a long one but I thought you did a good job with Live Poker so based on that I think you will do a good job here. All the best.

Thanks, bundy. I appreciate that. But I'm curious as to why you think I won't be here long. Have you been speaking to the powers that be?

It is really I suppose just based on your time at B & M or whatever it was called back then that you seemed to vanish after awhile after introducing all the changes.

Actually that was a coincidence. I took a job as a dealer in a poker room with a really strict social media policy. Many supervisors knew my screen name so I thought it best to stay off the site.

I deleted several posts in the covert influence thread because they were simply reposting Musk's tweets with no discussion of their content. I left one as it sets the stage for the original thread question.

When posting tweets or video clips, don't just post and run. We want to hear your opinion/assessment of the material. Otherwise if someone wants to read Musk's twitter they can follow him (or a tv show, etc)

Thanks

sounds fair, will do. although that was exactly tackling the topic of psyops imo.

elon is going nuts about fauci and the twitter files/m psyops right now.

check it out everyone.

thanks. It was on topic (although perhaps in more categories than just one--maybe fitting into covert ops as well as disinformation) But as I said, without adding your own thoughts, it's just a retweet.

fair enough. I wanted to let you know by the sheer amout of tweets that something is up. maybe thats why his space mission is delayed. dude is going nuts on twitter. Im gonna try and find some articles soon.

I moved a few posts about the Musk tweets back to the Musk thread. The posts were fine, but as the discussion grew I wanted to clear it out of the mod discussion thread.

I agree, that is how it used. Kinda like someone saying, "That's so gay." So, I assume you would find both of those expressions to be acceptable in this forum? (For the record, I think both expressions are highly inappropriate.)

Wat??? My response was a direct response to what the poster literally said! I quoted a brief portion of Scripture that referenced Christ, whom the poster himself mentioned first.

Thanks, browser2920.

Your response wasn't related to the topic of the thread. Rather, you were bringing into a discussion of flu shot effectiveness a debate as to whether using the word Christ as an exclamatory remark is acceptable. If that is the issue you would like to address, by all means surface that in the moderation discussion thread for follow up.

The "that's so gay" is not in the same category. That remark associates being gay with a usually bad or messed up situation. It is a slur to a group of people.

I recommend you follow up in the mod thread. It's a good topic to discuss. The use of the names of gods brings up an unusual twist because not everyone believes in the godliness of the names used, nor the books they are mentioned in. For example, if Christ is to be deleted as it is offensive to some, what about if someone posts "By Thor's hammer!" as an exclamatory remark?

I'll leave it at that for this thread. If you'd like to explore it further, post a question in the mod thread.
Thanks.

Umm...this IS the Mod thread!

Thanks for the clarification.

So, is this your official position as moderator:

Using the Lord's name in vain is acceptable, while using "That's so gay" is not.