We were advised that the hijacking was getting a bit much. Which, OK, likely it was. But traditionally, after 675 posts, things were generally on the loose side. I mean, how many times can we argue over whether they had cell phones in 1787?
Is this just a drift in the approach that I’ve somehow missed?
In this case, I don’t believe the subject is exhausted on its subject matter. It may be for some participants, but not for others. Some threads are ongoing for far longer than 675 posts.
Defining a thread hijack can be very subjective and is usually up to moderator discretion. If you’re looking for a diagram that tells you exactly when you’re engaging in a hijack, I don’t think that’s possible. But as you pointed out, you kind of know when it’s happening. Right?
I think if someone is going so far afield as to litigate past elections, single out politicians for complaint or drift off into a discussion about student loan debt, these are easy calls re hijacking. We have so many other threads where these specific things are being or have been discussed. Use those threads, or start a new one, please.
I get what @Aspenglow is on about but I would say there are natural digressions that can occur in a thread…especially a long one like that.
The Elizabeth Warren “hijack” in that thread I think resolved itself. Someone made a comment, some posts about that were made and then it ended. Had it gone off on whether Warren is a good or bad senator or how much control she has or whether she is in the leadership and so on would certainly be a hijack. But, I am not sure a thread veering off into a side-bar and then getting back on track is really a hijack.