You shut down this thread after it got hijacked into a really stupid discussion about Al Sharpton (I assume that’s why you closed it.) What gives? You instructed everyone to stop the hijack, and Alkash was the only one who ignored the instructions. Since the Al Sharpton stuff was a pretty transparent attempt by Alkash to hijack the thread off its original topic, why not just warn him and leave the thread open?
Apologies for commenting on a thread I didn’t actually contribute to — I was enjoying reading it, though!
Sometimes when I look at a thread I just think the damage is too severe and the participants should try again. At the point I closed it that thread had 98 posts - including my last one - and 25 of them were from our troublemaker.
Not that there’s some magical threshold I look for but it was clear to me that starting over - you should do that - would be a better option than trying to recover that thread.
Anyway, fair enough. It just rubbed me the wrong way, since shutting down the conversation seemed to be exactly what Alkash wanted to do, and his/her wish was definitely granted.
Hey Jonathan, the hijack was largely the actions of one poster. If a new thread starts on the original topic, is there a way to keep him from hijacking the next one, too? Report him sooner and more frequently or something?
That would be good. Maybe work something into the OP that you’d prefer the hijack not occur again. Originating posters preferences don’t rule, of course, but taking them into consideration isn’t unheard of.