This mod disagrees with making thread-splitting the new rule.
I think we need to have a consistent rule across all forums for when threads get split. Posters are already confused enough about which rules apply to which forums.
Splitting threads is a time-consuming thing in a fast-moving thread. There’s no way around reviewing the entire contents of the thread to determine which post belongs in which thread. If you’ve watched a P&E thread grow when something of high interest occurs – 50 to 100 posts an hour – you begin to appreciate the magnitude of the work.
Moreover, it feels like people who hijack get rewarded for doing it, and the work to fix it is placed entirely on the mods. Is it that much for mods to ask a poster to start a new thread and link back to the originating post if they’ve got an interesting hijack?
Not really the majority, but probably close to half the time.
And again it varies by forum. Once a Café thread is largely played out, especially TV viewing type threads, I know I’m very lenient on thread drift. But GD, mostly try to keep the threads focused on the OP.
IMHO is pretty loose to start with. The Pit and MPSIMS I think are treated the same way.
I think this is significant. I often lose track of which forum a particular subject is in, and never really thought of any differences other than “cite?” in GD. I always thought MPSIMS mainly silly, playful stuff, and never used to spend much time there. Always seems weird that “news” stories are now there, and are some of the most strictly modded threads.
I didn’t recall there being such significant differences before. Maybe my (relatively few) recent disagreements with a couple of the mods is largely due to their forums being modded differently than I remember from past practice…
I think the rules against hijacking are fairly consistent throughout the forum. The only change is that we’ve made it clear we’ll moderate hijacking more actively in P&E and GD threads.
This isn’t a change to the rules. It’s just enforcing existing rules in a more muscular way. I understand it can feel like a change, though.
My feeling was that the new direction was set forth by the late Jonathan_Chance back in early 2020 (this was linked by @Aspenglow back in post #9) but may not have been a strongly enforced prior to adding the new group of mods and getting them up to speed. So there is a ‘recent’ change to the extent that nearly 3 years is ‘recent’ to this group, as well as the slow process of adding enough mods to put it into effect. Heck Aspenglow was officially added into the trollhide wearing top-cop group in June of 2021, merely a heartbeat ago by that standard.
Yes, if you chose to do it the way I suggested. But in my Learn-Something-New-Every-Day category, @Max_S offers an even more expedient method in his post above:
In threads where you’re actively following along, you’re unlikely to miss a mod note. It’s harder in fast-moving threads.
Speaking only for myself, I’m pretty lenient in fast-moving threads. In the January 6th hearings thread, I tried to re-post the caution against hijacking every 200 posts in an effort to remind everyone what the thread was for.
In that one, I stupidly allowed a hijack to run on about Trump “lunging” for the steering wheel of the vehicle in an effort to go to the Capitol building and whether that was actually possible and whether it was a lunge for the steering wheel and not the driver’s clavicles and and and… that hijack ran on for nearly 200 posts before I finally interceded. I let it run because the discussion was tangentially related to the hearings. But it was a mistake, and I resolved to not let hijacks run away like that again.
Well, I feel like most hijacks aren’t intentional, they are just normal thread drift. And moving the posts that generate replies out of the thread means that future replies to those posts are automatically elsewhere. My thought was not that doing this would mollify cranky posters, but that it might facilitate more total discussion, some of it interesting.
But if the idea isn’t popular with either posters or mods, I’ll drop it.
(Asking the poster if they want me to do it, and then waiting for a reply, and then maybe having more posts to move is not something I want to do. That’s a lot more work than just moving hijacks. I’ve done that a couple times recently, and I’m not going to keep doing it unless there’s a STRONG push to do so. Or maybe for a rare exciting tangent.)
I don’t see a need for it. If posters find a tangent interesting enough, then they can link back and/or quote their posts in the originating thread when they make a new one.
I can see a poster asking their post to be moved to the new thread, and it would depend on how much work that is for you as to whether you do.
Yeah, linking back is less effective, because you can’t naturally read a post and reply to it in the same place. It’s certainly always possible to start a new thread. But having the posts that started it in the same place is more user-friendly.
I’m just saying that it makes more sense for a poster to ask that their post to be transferred to the new thread, than for the moderator to have to dig through the posts and make that decision themselves.
I assume that’s less work for the mod, but I don’t really know.
I guess I thought P&E a more “serious” forum, sorta a subset of GD. But this - and other threads - are simply insult pile-ons. It sure didn’t start with much of a proposition statement. Is that not “Pitty?” Or is it OK, because the boards trend Liberal? And we don’t even need to ask whether discussing werewolves and vampires is a hijack.
I looked at the P&E rules and see:
But the thread is continuing just mocking the candidate, with no moderation trying to direct discussion.
I have no objection to that thread, but it is an example of why I am confused as to the supposed different rules and tone for the different fora, and how they are applied. Strikes me as odd to see such material in P&E, and see similar stuff disfavored in IMHO/MPSIMS.
Yes, a thread about Walker is going to be bizarre because it’s responding to bizarre things.
Joe Biden is prone to gaffes, so a thread about him might have some jokes and some jabs at his expense as well.
A thread talking about, say, Nancy Pelosi’s husband being attacked is much less likely to have the same sorts of responses.
Other forums are similar; MPSIMS might have one thread talking about finding a store that sells silly hats, and a breaking news thread about a school shooting. They are going to be treated very differently despite being in the same category. MPSIMS itself is described as being, “from frivolous chatter to deep thoughts; from harmless diversions to life-changing announcements.”
I don’t see this as inconsistency or a problem. Two things I try to keep in mind when posting in a thread, if I want to stay on the right side of the mods… First, “read the room” to get the feel of what might be appropriate. And second, pay attention to any mod notes if there are any there.
Speaking for myself, if a tangent is more than just one person with a hobby horse, I would be happy with an auto-split in the part of a moderator. I would also be happy that the decision be left up to the judgment of the moderator in question.
Speaking as a mod in MPSIMS, i think of that as one of our kinder, gentler forums, and i try to take “don’t be a jerk” fairly seriously. But of course i would moderate differently in threads about:
“Russia has invaded Ukraine”
“My wife just died”
“Here are photos of my hamster”
“Here’s a photo of a funny sign i saw on a road trip”
There might be a great deal of snarkiness in that last thread, and that would be totally okay. Where it would likely be pretty jerkish in the second one.
