A long time ago, there was a poll thread about the paranormal in which the OP specifically requested “no debating”. TPTB did their best to maintain that request.
To give you an idea how long ago this was, @Diogenes_the_Cynic was a participant.
This goes absolutely, 180°, against how you missed my thread, mentioned above.
I’ve noticed we’ve had a few hundred reads, but only 20 some posts. So I figured I’d throw in a general poll for all the people that are reading but don’t have anything they feel like posting. This is again a simplified poll based on the three main categories I believe we’re seeing.
- OP sets the stage, but no additional control other than normal flags.
- OP sets the stage, and their flags should be given extra consideration, but not control.
- OP sets the stage, and should have controlling interest in what is on or off topic.
- Something else entirely - and you should post it!
0 voters
The way I’m reading this thread is that it’s about what posters want, not what’s currently happening. I disagree with the handling of that thread along with the people in this thread linked here.
I guess that brings up the hypothetical possibility that someone could tailor their OP so narrowly that no discussion is possible. For instance, in an existence of God thread, an atheist might start a thread asking for proof of the existence of God using only science and no quotes of the Bible are allowed. Or conversely, a religious person might ask for the non-existence of God but only Bible quotes are allowed.
That’s a fair discussion, but I don’t think it’s a big deal. If people want to engage in that kind of discussion, they will. If they don’t, the thread will die off the page.
With those two examples, I think such threads would actually still be reasonably broad enough as to permit good discussion.
Correct - there have been multiple ATMB threads in which complaints about the nature of ‘off topic’ and ‘hijacks’ overlap with presumably valid comparisons. Since each of those threads have a tendency to fight the last war over and over again, I felt it was more helpful to split off and side-step another such battle.
Plus, whatever side of such threads you were arguing, we all reply, we almost all create new topics - the matter of steering a thread should be of interest to everyone. I don’t pretend that the STMB is a democracy, but it would be helpful to us the readers to have an idea of what the opinions are. And it’s up to the Mods as to whether those opinions should have an affect in how they choose to moderate a post.
I am glad to see that we tend to agree that there’s nothing wrong with creating a tight, well thought out OP for a debate based thread. It’s one thing to have a loose, or general thread when working in MPSIMS or Cafe Society, but for a truly wonderful debate, it’s helpful to have it well framed from the start. Which should be a goal as all good posters anyway. And one of the reasons I posted my opinion about not letting the OP aggressively drive the topic is that if it was something you as the OP had NOT originally thought of, it might lead to new insights, even if the knee-jerk reaction is ‘that’s not what I meant!’.
@What_Exit, I know you’ve mostly replied based on your desires as a poster, rather than as a mod, but IS there any sort of guideline on how much latitude to give the OP in steering the thread? I’ve seen your responses in many of the cited threads, and in the majority you seem stuck trying to simultaneously interpret what the OP is getting at (to prevent sidetracks) and deal with a plethora of flags (which may or may not be valid). In examples of the first case, consulting the OP seems to make sense, although that’s another argument for a tight initial post.
And yes, I fully acknowledge that the SDMB is all about NOT setting bright lines when possible, because of the behavior that encourages, AND each forum and poster has it’s own quirks which require a different touch. If you want to ask any other mods that you feel would be willing to share, please feel free!
There are some topics, though, that are almost impossible to not veer into a well-worn, tired, wearisome old debate unless the mods and OP take great effort to ensure it stays on the tight and narrow.
For instance, I can’t recall a single thread about female circumcision that didn’t have at least one Doper trying to make it into a talk about male circumcision.
I don’t see this specifically on this list, but this topic might be a candidate for this rule in GD. especially given how you just described it.
Just spitballing and not making rules or bright lines.
@ParallelLines; the subjects with narrow focus should be either
- a well constructed Debate. Threads that convince a moderator to devote the time to it, it will need. Believe it or not we are a limited resource.
- A select part of a very tired debate where there is nothing new to debate from the last 30 iterations.
As to the male circumcision, I would at least modnote a poster that brought it up in the female circumcision thread and possibly warn them.
On that note: The subject of circumcision will not be revisited in this thread by any posters. The mention of it here is not an invite to talk about it.
@Heffalump_and_Roo, I do think that rule pretty well covers in for GD.
I think another reason threads tend to derail, regardless of how hard an OP tries to set the boundaries in his/her beginning opening post, is that many Dopers don’t read the opening post at all. They just reply to the latest comments in the thread. Once derailed, always derailed.
So even if the OP sets clear, clear rails and boundaries in his/her opening post, a lot of people will either disregard or not even read it.
The problem with staff notices, if they’re a little ugly and no formatting.
Have to be manually tagged to show who added the staff notice.
BTW: {WE?} means note from What Exit?
That makes perfect sense, and I don’t doubt it at all. It’s a thankless task, and you end up with everyone mad at your, especially when emotions engage and reason checks out.
You make a very, very good point there. I have lost track of how many times I’ve checked back in a thread (even short, sub 20 post threads) and someone has repeated the exact same thing I said a half-dozen posts back. Which I get if it’s a fast moving thread, but not when it was 10 hours ago. Sadly, I can’t think of a fix for it. 
This is a big one. I can’t even guess how many times I’ve seen people post “I haven’t read the thread yet but…” 50 or 100 replies into the thread. Really, if you can’t take the time to read the thread maybe you shouldn’t waste everyone else’s time with your post that is just a duplicate of an earlier post.
Also, people who only read the title or first couple of sentences of an OP, totally ignoring the rest of the post that explains what the thread is about.
This shouldn’t happen with the change to Discourse with it’s live updating but damned if it still doesn’t happen.
And if you are going to jump into a thread about why people think the earth is flat that’s 1000 posts long, posting “religion” at post 1001 is dumbfounding. Do you really think religion didn’t come up anywhere in the first 1000 posts?
I really don’t think it’s too much to ask for someone to read the thread if they are going to contribute to it.
Like everything it depends. If the Op boils down to “What do you think about this subject?”, there is nothing wrong with jumping in.
If not a what do you think thread though and it has 60 posts though and you posts something 10 hours later that 3 posters, posted earlier. It just shows you’re being lazy. Use the search function first, please.
(FTR: I have done this before, I felt embarrassed.)
Since I usually use the multi quote option, and comment as I read thru the thread, when I get to the end I often delete many of my replies that were already covered by someone else. It’s not hard to do and it saves people having to reread something that was already posted. Well, those that don’t have me on ignore. 
I concur. Except as the Op, I think they get one, maybe two posts of "Can we get back to the original debate/question/issue here please?’ posts without being called out for Junior Modding.
Of course if it is a total Hijack they can report it- but note that sometimes hijacks are not so bad. So the Mod needs to take a look at the thread and where the posters want it to go. Sure if one or two posters have gone off into a tangent that ruins the discussion for everyone, then get it back on track. But sometimes everyone has cheerfully taking the train onto a new track. That is something that takes a lot of work and experience by a Mod, so I understand it is not easy.
But threads go the way they want to go. Trying to over control them ruins the organicness of the discussion flow.
As Johnny here sez:
What_Exit brings up a excellent point here:
This is exactly why I avoid threads with thousands of posts if I didn’t get into the thread early. I’m not going to wade through thousands, and even if I did I am guaranteed to miss something. I don’t want to be that guy so I just stay out of it.
I assume you mean “reporting your accusation of junior modding to the Mods, and not in the thread itself”, right?
Hmmmm. I kinda feel like others besides the OP should maybe also be able to ask folks to stay on track? Sometimes I start reading an interesting thread, and I think I have something to add that hasn’t been said before, but it’s already veered so far off-topic I feel weird about just responding to the OP. If I saw that someone was still interested in the OP’s topic, I might be more willing to jump in late.
I’ve been on a handful of message boards. I remember one where the OP was essentially the unquestioned mod of their own thread. They didn’t have mod privileges in a software sense but anything they wanted, the mods would do. I hated that.
On another board, the mods would chide OPs for asking people to please stick to the topic–not even to say “hey, use the report function instead” but rather “threads drift; deal with it.” I certainly liked that better than the first board, and I agree with letting threads meander. But it bothers me when it seems like someone is trying to address the OP but missing the mark, and I think discussions are richer for posters being able to call that out when they see it.
On another board, the mods are very strict about deleting off-topic posts. I get it; it’s a dedicated hobby board, not a general discussion forum. But not all off-topic posts are created equal. Sometimes someone is providing useful info that’s tangential to the OP topic; sometimes someone is goofing around; sometimes someone is engaging in hate speech, or responding to hate speech in the thread to criticize it. Mostly, they all just get deleted as off-topic, without acknowledgement other than a mod post that off-topic posts have been deleted. That kind of rubs me the wrong way.