Should "cute" animal posts be allowed on General Discussion?

lol

My adorable walrus thread and an equally adorable panda thread were locked as being "off topic." Hello, I didn't know that GENERAL meant a specific topic.

I agree. "General" is a fantastic place for it.

rules.

change the rules and i will follow those.

3.
something that occurs in a certain place during a particular interval of time.


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/event

i really do not go hunting for things to lock. i will say, i do not care. and if you alert? i am off to a nap. someone else around, that would be theres to do.

on edit.... your point on current event is relevant. i will ask about that when it is brought up in the future. it is more voted on. and adm can weigh in on anything and tell me what to do. that is fine with me, too.

I can still change it. Thought it was pretty cut and dry.

Push polls are very popular within some demographics.

People who want serious are not disparaged in the poll's wording.

I don't know if you see that.

Is there any other choice? If so they can choose Other and elaborate.

Those are very common posts, so voting to keep it serious doesn't fit. You set up your poll to have one yes and two nos.

I think most people here get it.

And clever phrases too!

and the ugliness to a minimum. Thank heavens for the occasional cute animal post.

An occasional cutie is a welcome relief.

There have been days when it's just too much.

Seriously, though, if I want cute animals I can hit up other places. I've got some freaks on my FB page that inundate me with cute pictures of their kids, their dogs, their cats, their flowers and whatever else they have deemed "cute".

We've had our share of cuteness here and frankly, I find more cuteness in seeing a loved Dem with pictures of their kids, animals or others with the cute factor. That's as far as I'd rather go.

Call me somber, depressing or morose. I'd rather not see kittens, puppies and whatnot fill GD. Blech.

The lounge probably is the better place. That's why Skinner and Elad designed DU as it is. Everything has a place.

The panda photos were released by the Vienna Zoo, a renowned public institution, which is one of the few zoos to have pandas on loan for breeding purposes as pandas are an extremely endangered species. This in itself is news worthy. The fact that these creatures have a stimulating atmosphere is important for their well being which also makes this news worthy.

It does not matter if I open every post. The question is, do cute kitty pictures that are posted only for that reason belong in DU? I say they do not.

if it's a story about a animal, etc it is GD material.

dont know. just saying

or discuss issues with du. on the new and improved du, .... they call it "whining".

hence, your OP.

host forum is where alerts come to for hosts to decide if they break the SOP. so, if there is an Op that is whing about say, no cute animal pictures in GD and someone alerts, then the hosts have to decide if it breaks SOP. if it breaks it, we are suppose to lock, if it does not break it we leave it alone.

but, i just checked and there are no alerts. i dont alert cause i really dont care.

if extreme beauty were allowed in as well.

This photo does pan across the lake at a snail's pace, however it is something I don't mind seeing more than once.

&feature=related

Is the Lounge really that bad?

There isn't a regular deluge of such posts --
they're occasional, and always heartwarming,
which is energizing and humanizing -- essential
for effective political discussion.

Also, nice poetry, but there is a regular deluge of such posts. I could link to dozens of such posts.

We have a system in place for a reason, if you want to get away from the political, go to the Lounge.



vs.



I don't see any other way of reading that then what the clear interpretation is that there is a division and until the system is changed, it is what it is.

just expressing my point of view.

Because the quantity of Lounge posts overwhems the page. Sometimes there are fights in the Lounge, that might be better managed in General. But it does look like this thread is going away. Bye.

GD can from time to time become depressing, frustrating, anger provoking and even outright nasty.
As it should be. That is why we are here.
That's why the occasional picture of a cute chipmunk picture is necessary.
It lowers the blood pressure.

If I don't want to look at them, I don't have to.

There is some tradition there.

That's why it's so shocking that they are banned now. I miss teh kittehs!

political fora are serious business!

everything must be relevant to my issues. not yours, mine! says so on page 46, subsection 7, paragraph 3 of the... oh now where in the hell did the DU by laws go. is it shuffled within the pile of various forum rules and personal manifestos, again?

give me a minute, i'll be back. but don't let me catch you having fun in the meantime!

I realize many like the "cute" animal posts ... I have no problem with them but that is not what I come to general discussion for.

I love the satirical posts .... I love the "toons" .... many of these non-serious posts trigger or further discussion .... what is there to be said about the "curesy" posts other than awww (or its equivalent).

If I were Empress they'd be posted in the the lounge

I simply don't see the purpose of gratuitous OPs (haven't seen a glut of the "isn't this cute" posts in a long time), in General Discussion.

If the truth be told .... I am not truly invested in ridding GD of them. I think they would be better in the lounge, but can't get truly "worked up" about them anywhere. If I inadvertently open one, I close it.

Sneaking them into threads is a brilliant idea. Can you imagine all the alerts?

Haven't you noticed?

I would banish all dog stuff to the lounge personally. Yep, I'm biased against dogs, can't stand them or the threads about them. Typical example - "What a heroic dog story!"

threads about ignorant, pathetic, cruel teabaggers doing ignorant, pathetic, cruel things.

--we just think we are sooooo important that we deserve all the attention!!

Why should our shenanigans trump those of other animals?

Record as part of a speech delivered by Senator Robert C. Byrd on April 23, 1990.

George G. Vest

Eulogy of the Dog
23 September 1870
Warrensburg, Missouri

Gentlemen of the jury—

The best friend a man has in the world may turn against him and become his enemy. His son or daughter whom he has reared with loving care may prove ungrateful. Those who are nearest and dearest to us, those whom we trust with out happiness and our good name, may become traitors to their faith. The money that a man has he may lose. It flies from him perhaps when he needs it most. A man’s reputation may be sacrificed in a moment of ill-considered action. The people who are prone to fall on their knees to do us honor when success is with us may be the first to throw the stone of malice when failure settles its cloud upon our heads. The one absolutely unselfish friend that a man can have in this selfish world, the one that never deserts him, the one that never proves ungrateful or treacherous, is the dog.

Gentlemen of the jury, a man’s dog stands by him in prosperity and in poverty, in health and in sickness. He will sleep on the cold ground when the wintry winds blow and the snow drives fiercely, if only he can be near his master’s side. He will kiss the hand that has no food to offer, he will lick the wounds and sores that come in encounter with the roughness of the world. He guards the sleep of his pauper master as if he were a prince.

When all other friends desert, he remains. When riches take wings and reputation falls to pieces, he is as constant in his love as the sun in its journey through the heavens. If fortune drives the master forth an outcast into the world, friendless and homeless, the faithful dog asks no higher privilege than that of accompanying him, to guard him against danger, to fight against his enemies. And when the last scene of all comes, and death takes his master in its embrace and his body is laid in the cold ground, no matter if all other friends pursue their way, there by his graveside will the noble dog be found, his head between his paws and his eyes sad but open, in alert watchfulness, faithful and true, even unto death.

http://www.doggyheaven.com/blogs.php?blog_id=7

What the hell is the point to having different forums when GD just becomes a dumping ground for everything? It moves fast enough anyway without cluttering it up with Lounge posts.

So much for DU3 supposedly being MORE strict about what forums members use. It's even more unorganized now than DU2 ever was.

to diffuse tensions at critical junctures. Let the cuteness remain!

As long as that's not the reason a thread is locked, that is.

They're also often used to make political statements or points. But, cuteness for the sake of being cute probably belongs in the Lounge in most cases.

and recommend them. Indeed the poll results show they are wanted by the majority so why is a handful of people, dare I say 1% , able to trump the will of the people?

We have 'caption this' photo and other pictures posted in general that are not 'cute' animals.

People that want to comment on them can and those that don't can trash the thread to not be bothered seeing them. It really isn't that hard to hide the posts you don't care about and plenty of 'serious' discussion threads are in GD.

They're at least as legitimate as beautiful aurora posts.

I seldom use emoticons but since I palmed my face when I saw this thread I might as well do it here:

First of all, I am totally aware of the worth of my two cents, which is less than nil fwiw.

And while I have posted the same opinions with other DUers who have posed the same opinion as the current O.P., one of my previous posts is below, I'll preface that with these points:

* Beyond cuteness or why this is a question now in GD instead of Meta, I'll say that the real issue is whether or not to have different forums with individual SoPs.

Redundantly, I'll say: Those who insist on anti-SoP pose the same "reasons":

* That GD is too serious. Uh, no, there is plenty of GD humor available, political cartoons, wingnut outrages and gaffes, COLBERT, whatever.

* That the anti-SoP threads provide "relief." The fallacy is that somebody would stay forever in GD without ever doing anything thing else whether in real life or on the internet. The solution to being burned out in GD is to go to the appropriate places to find the relief instead of falsely claiming that the relief can only be found in GD.

* That a great service is being done by the anti-SoP-ers.

* That great popularity, whether via polls or by Views or by number of Replies, is justification enough to abuse the SoP.

* (Continuing with an Edit...) Meh, on second thought, I'll just save this into a Repeat file for the next times.


*****************************

(thread, “Why I post kitteh threads in GD") http://www.democraticunderground.com/124079704

My Post: Kindly I say

I don't believe some off-topic threads, such as yours, are meant to annoy. And I similarly do not entertain the "wanting attention" thing. And, I love cute animals and agree with other off-topic threads: I just look for those things in the places set aside for them.

Instead, I disagree with some of your premises:

* "topics in GD unrelentingly serious/grim" - there's plenty of GD/on-topic humor mocking wingnuts. Your premise is that humor, by definition, has to be off-topic for GD in order to be humor. If a "break" is needed, the fabulous multi-faceted DU provides all the other forums (fora?), not to mention pursuing the rest of the internet or just any other life activities, sleeping or whatever.

* "gravitate to certain forums, GD/comfortable." Somebody I agree with said, "Why not post in the appropriate forum to begin with?"

* In another thread on this Meta page, there's this: "then just what is the point of having rules." Others who have railed against the GD SoP have made their case saying that "General" means *anything*. When it was named "Soap Box" did that mean it was supposed to be about soap? So, "then just what is the point of having rules (SoPs)?" Instead of having forums and groups, why not just have one vast venue where EVERYTHING is posted together, from Lounge to Mid-East to guns and everything in between? Plus, this point of view seems to pontificate that THEY (the anti-SoPers) somehow have the unilateral privilege of making up their own rules, which they really could do by founding their own website. So, then, who are the members who must abide by SoPs and who are the ones with privileges to do what they want? I might ask how does a body get on the privileged list, but being Democratic and democratic I don't want to be privileged above any rules.

Really, please, I'm not hostile or negative to you, we don't even know each other for goodness' sake, am just responding on a topic that is a pet peeve that I participate in re-hashing.