Should "cute" animal posts be allowed on General Discussion?
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by seabeyond (a host of the General Discussion forum).
These photos spread joy and happiness among us. They can bring periods of greatly needed reprieve from heated and angry issues on the board. Yes, they are not necessarily serious, but represent an element in all normal discourse. People don't discuss serious issues ALL the time. Dialog between normal individuals usually includes differing topics, including those about cute and adorable things, such as animals and kids.
Anyway, I would like to get a feel for how pure people want this board to be. Should it be serious all the time, or should a little cuteness be allowed in?
| 23 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Poll closed | |
| Let the cuteness in! | |
20 (87%) |
|
| Keep it serious and somber. | |
2 (9%) |
|
| Other | |
1 (4%) |
|
| 0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided. | |
| Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll |
|
= new reply since forum marked as read
And clever phrases too!
if it's a story about a animal, etc it is GD material.
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.
Is the Lounge really that bad? 
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!
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!" 
--we just think we are sooooo important that we deserve all the attention!!
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
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?
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.
