The longest threads come from orthogonal thinking

As a fan of Magic, I check in on the Magic discussion boards fairly regularly. Lately, I’ve been entertained in a time-wasting, junk-food kind of way, by two different kinds of protracted debates. They’re especially entertaining when compared with each other, as they’re effectively mirror images.
First, we have the case of someone claiming that Remand is a bad card (hint: Remand is a good card). Result?
This thread that hit 318 posts before it was locked.
Second, we have the case of many people claiming that Dash Hopes is a good card (hint: it isn’t). Result?
This thread from when the card was first previewed last year, that hit 271 posts before petering out (although this was started by an “Is this card good?” question, rather than a statement that it is).
This thread that asserted that it was, indeed, a good card, and hit 121 posts as of sometime this morning.
…and an increasingly strong showing in this thread that asked people to name underrated cards.
The similarity between both the Remand and Dash Hopes arguments is the tendency of the proponents of each argument (against Remand, for Dash Hopes) to not understand the contextual nature of the concept of “good.” Anything is pretty much good or bad in the sense that it is a better or worse choice than the other options available in the environment. A Pinto may be better than walking if you have to cross the United States, but given that any other car exists, the Pinto is a bad car.*
*The linked article has an interesting discussion about how the Pinto was, in retrospect, not more dangerous than most other cars of its time. This may be good for the Pinto, or a commentary on car safety.