Is there a set amount of off topic replies after which threads are split?


Is there a set amount of off topic replies after which threads are split? Or is it based on percentage?

Is it ok to have a thread about “why do I dislike Islam?” filled with endless “yeah but about religion x, y and z?” ?
I see threads getting split for far less off topics than this.

We already have a thread about why Buddhism sucks, this one is about Islam, I approve the creation of “why Catholics & Protestants are bad and you should feel bad”, but checking new replies on this thread only to be met by an endless stream of:“yeah but what about the jews and Moses?” isn’t exactly interesting.

There’s fewer off topics in the typhoons thread, and that one fairly often goes way off the rails just for the lulz.

Why do I dislike Islam?

yep, the long-winded derailing of these threads is tedious. But what about …? What about…?


I would think it depends.

Bear with me a moment while I contribute to the windedness…

Language only has meaning if there is a discernible difference. We characterise things by their difference: tall, short, nice, toxic etc. It seems to me the thread is about reasons that makes Islam unlikeable. Expectation is: reasons should be unique to the religion, not common across contrasted religion.

IMO it seems like these long posts are pointing out the weak bases of those supposed differences. They seem to point out that ‘hey, you said this is the reason why this is unlikable, but the one you like is also based on the same principle’.

As I see it (I stand to be corrected) these posts are right on track. Lets discuss and argue on he basis of cogent reasons.

The alternative would be to maybe rename the thread ‘why I feel and think we should dislike Islam’, which title would be more accommodating of feelings and opinion.


I see your point, but after scrolling wall of text after wall of text of wikipedia articles explaining how 1800 years ago some Roman guy did something similar to what happens in current year in some islamic countries,or discussions about definitions/semantics of religions that have nothing to do with islam, the thing gets a bit redundant.

The “Buddhism is bad” thread is more on topic. I remember some time ago I had a look at it and it mostly has articles pointing out issues within buddhism, sex scandals etc, and I don’t recall many:“yeah but what about sex scandals in (insert other religions here)?”.

As I mentioned in my reply that you quoted, I see almost on a daily basis “this thread has been split” for things that are far less off topic than these.


Yes because bringing up mosaic laws when no one said anything about them and the continued pursuit of the arguement makes sense in the topic.

Are there a significant percentage of people who want to impose mosaic laws onto people? Even by terrorist attacks? No. Should have ended there.

Most of this could have been split.


The problem is what’s the argument for? Comparisons are fine unless the person makes it for the arguement sake for no purpose.

Islam isn’t bad?
Islam is good?
Christianity is bad?
Christianity is just as bad as Islam?
Mosaic laws are just as bad?

There’s zero direction to what the arguement is for but bringing up what about this.

The article it started from states the specific aspects as well. But completely ignored. Yes 44% want segregation in schools. No problem or problem? Yes they have no idea who did 911, problem or no problem? 15% don’t want music and Art taught, problem or no problem.

Sure there are some Muslims who are ok. There’s enough for me to throw islam under the bus.


Is there a set amount of off topic replies after which threads are split?

No. I try to if there’s more than a couple of posts that are off point, depending on the thread. Some threads are more conducive to banter.

But it’s not that I think this is one of those threads. I don’t see the point to having a thread focused solely on problems with Islam without the possibility for extended discussion and counter-argument. That’s all I see happening, whether you think those arguments are sound or not. I think @humpty is spot on above.


But what exactly is the counter argument? Mosaic laws are just as bad?

Ok if so, so what?


It’s mods mood!


That seems totally apparent with even a surface reading of the post. Humpty described it well:

I’m not going to split hairs about what’s a sound argument or not. It clearly seems on topic to me.


I think you guys need to go off-topic. This is getting kinda boring.


It may be boring, but about the average quality of lunch boxes in Taipei?


I wouldn’t know about that. I never eat those gut bombs (thanks for going off-topic).


All this is going to have to be split.


Yes, you are talking about @tempogain 's Buffer. Once it’s full, the posts parent_id’s are set to point to The Temp.

When this system is malfunctioning then @toe_save script kicks in and just makes all those pointers point to void. Some people suspect that actually this happens randomly.


Post something more interesting.


Because they don’t teach sewing in the schools anymore that’s why the threads are splitting. Its because of global trade and the balance of power is shifting to Pakistan so we need to do something about that. we could all just wear underwear maybe, although that can be off putting. The other option is all out war with the celestial beings.!And-now-for-something-completely-different-monty-python-39963860-500-250


My biggest problem is not with the quality of the lunch boxes… but the fact that it’s rather random whether I get a box packed full of yummy goodies or something only half full.

How can the guy in front of me get a lunch box wich is bulging at the sides while my box isn’t even full? I really don’t get it…


The laobanniang thinks you need to lose weight, and she’s trying to give you a hint?


This would also explain why I seem to always be there target of the people passing out pamphlets from Gold’s Gym.

Does anyone know whether the gym membership is worth it? Is it an annual fee? Or pay per usage?