I've noticed lately that a lot of people are taking every opportunity they have to take a negative topic and reference the newest US President, Donald Trump.

Not that I'm trying to get people to stop bringing it up, but it got me thinking about other topics, completely irrelevant to the OP, that are thrown into answers and comments as pure jabs to the topic/person, Donald Trump being the latest target.

Are there any topics that are frowned upon in answers/comments or is anything fair game as long as it doesn't start up a conversation about said topic, deviating from the OP?


Comment: "I don't think this is a duplicate"

Reply: "That's because Trump hasn't made it an executive order yet."


Comment: "Would this answer work for an email format, as well?"

Reply: "Sure, Hillary, just make sure you use the correct email account."

While it may be funny, just seems like it wasn't needed and shows new users it's okay to say anything you want, regardless of it's relevancy.

  • 6
    All sorts of irrelevancies are frowned upon. It is up to the discretion of the mods whether it is worth the energy to deal with.
    – Mitch
    Commented Jan 31, 2017 at 16:38
  • 9
    If it's a comment, please, please flag it as either Not Constructive or Too Chatty. Those don't appear to be offensive, but they are out of place. Comments are not for chat or flippancy. (And if enough flags are raised, the comment is autodestructed without moderators having to act on them.)
    – Andrew Leach Mod
    Commented Feb 1, 2017 at 0:23
  • 1
    @AndrewLeach: do you really mean flippancy is always off-topic? It can be a valuable way of making a point. Commented Feb 7, 2017 at 10:27
  • Flippancy in part of an answer is a different matter. It's when it's the sole content of a post or comment that it becomes a problem.
    – user171152
    Commented Feb 27, 2017 at 2:52

1 Answer 1


If something is irrelevant to an answer, it should be edited out. If something is only relevant as an example, but the example is too inflammatory or distracting, it should be changed. The fact that Donald Trump is Hitler Jr doesn't make that pertinent to answers.

  • So far I haven't seen any stem into anything substantial but I've seen a lot of jabs at President Trump's character today, mostly from topics that were already negative so he was used as an example, even though it wasn't necessary. Just seemed a little uncivilized to me, when the answer/comment was not made better or clearer because of it.
    – Hank
    Commented Jan 31, 2017 at 17:47
  • +1 Good illustration by example.
    – MetaEd
    Commented Jan 31, 2017 at 18:12
  • 6
    If the example is illustrative and just happens to use Trump as the exemplar, then it's fine to keep in the post. If the post doesn't need an example, or the reference is completely superfluous, so that the post would be the same or better if it were removed, it should be removed (not because it's inflammatory, but because it is useless). This is true of all examples and references, and the rules don't change for Trump. If someone's example rubs you the wrong way because of your politics, suck it up. If it's useless noise ("Hey guys!", "Thanks in advance!", "Trump is a buffoon!"), remove it.
    – Dan Bron
    Commented Jan 31, 2017 at 19:18
  • @DanBron Yeah, it's not that it rubs me or anything, it just got me thinking. Stuff like "I don't think this is a duplicate", as a comment, getting a reply saying, "That's because Trump hasn't made it an executive order yet." While it may be funny, just seems like it wasn't needed at all and shows new users it's okay to say anything you want, regardless of it's relevancy.
    – Hank
    Commented Jan 31, 2017 at 19:36
  • 4
    @Hank Little jokes like the ones in your updated question don't seem like a big deal but they would be fair game for editing out. We've actually had questions closed or totally re-written because the examples in the questions were too inflammatory and not required for the linguistic point at hand. OTOH We've also seen linguistic questions that rubbed people the wrong way (usually dealing with slang or vulgar expressions) which had to stand as they were despite the brouhaha they caused. Commented Jan 31, 2017 at 19:54

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .