New rule in Cafe Society?

About This Message Board
1

In this thread about LOST, I contributed a post that takes a negative view of the show. Twickster comes down on me for threadshitting.

This puzzles me. First of all, as I continue to participate in the thread, it’s clear I’m not just lobbing a turd for the sake of sabotaging the discussion; I’m joining the discussion in good faith.

In the past, whenever I’ve started a thread discussing Verhoeven, for example, it’s become standard practice that a clicque of usual suspects will dive feet first into the thread with no greater contribution that “Verhoeven is a hack!” And those posters have traditionally been allowed to strangle any intelligent discussion of the subject. When, early on, before I learned my lesson, I complained about this, I was told in no uncertain terms that people are allowed to express negative opinions in Cafe Society, and that a negative opinion does NOT equal threadshitting. NO ONE has ever been modded for threadshitting for these drivebys in a Verhoeven thread; I’m expected to take my lumps and try to have the discussion around them.

Threadshitting, in my understanding, is when an OP is something like “Everyone who loves Oprah check in here!” and someone lobs an “Oprah sucks!” post. Or a funeral thread, when someone chimes in with “Ingmar Bergman was a hack! good riddance!”

It’s never been the case before, as far as I know, that a negative opinion of a work under discussion equals threadshitting. Is that really the rule? that no one is allowed to participate in that LOST thread unless they have nothing but praise for the show?

What are the implications of this? If a discussion of a work is not allowed to go the way it goes–always excepting true threadshitting of course–does this mean there will have to be separate threads for each work? One positive, one negative?

If this is indeed the standard of what threadshitting is, I have mixed feelings. First, awesome! I can actually hold an intelligent discussion about Paul Verhoeven or Lars Von Trier, and twickster will be there at my back, admonishing all the driveby “Verhoeven is a hack!” posts. But on the other hand, free, good-faith debate about a controversial work will suffer, no?

Bottom line: is lowering the standard of threadshitting in this way–moving away from defining it as malicious, bad-faith posts intended to sabotage a thread, and toward defining it as simply an unpopular opinion–is this *good *for free discussion in Cafe Society, or bad for it?

(And preemptively: it’s certainly possible that my wordchoice–“tripe,” etc.–can be interpreted as malicious. First, I made it clear that I was still intending to watch the entire series, so I think I have a right to call it tripe if I think it’s tripe; I’m making the good-faith effort to watch it anyway. If it’s an honest opinion, which it was. Secondly, this objection is irrelevant: I was not moderated for my word choice, or for my tone, but for threadshitting. And even so, as my IRL friend who’s making me watch the show can tell you, I say “tripe” with a crooked grin of resignation, not with malice, as I buckle down to watch the rest of this, uh, cheesefest.)

Again, just to bottomline it: twickster’s ruling seems closer to censorship than crowd control than I’m comfortable with in CS.

2

The discussion in question was about the mysteries in Lost–it was a very narrowly framed question (and the timing is perfect, since the final season starts tomorrow). In such a thread, your (generic ‘you’) opinion of the show is not only irrelevant, but unwanted/asked for. “What one Lost mystery do you most want answered?” isn’t an invitation to say (paraphrased) “The big mystery is: why do you all watch this tripe?” That’s threadshitting–it’s so far off-topic that it’s not even funny.

If the topic at hand is “In Star Wars, why aren’t self-aware droids treated as people?”, a response of “The big question is why do you care? This stuff sucks.” is threadshitting.

If the thread was “What is your opinion of Lost?” or “How do you feel about Lost, now that we’re in the final season?” your post would (IMO) have been ok. But that wasn’t the topic.

3

Off topic = threadshitting? I wasn’t moderated for off topic.

I can buy off topic. But an honest opinion, not intended to sabotage the discussion, should not be called threadshitting just because it’s negative.

4

Come on man. You equivocated on the meaning of “mystery”. Obviously, the OP wanted to know about *plot *mysteries. How was your little shot intended to further the discussion of plot mysteries?

5

Not the most egregious example of threadshitting, but I think it qualifies. I think that had your two posts been combined into one, it would have looked like a humorous (or humorless, depending on one’s POV) aside (albeit still off-topic). Stand-alone, you pretty much took everyone to task for watching the series voluntarily.

I think a better question is “Why was lissener called out and not mswas for saying nearly the same thing?”

6

So, taking it as a given that my post was indeed off topic–which I acknowledge, after some thought, and apologize for–can we come up with a definitive distinction between “off topic” and “threadshitting”?

7

No need. You were threadshitting. From the OP –

How can you think otherwise? You specifically ignored that request. And, as** D_Odds** points out, you were calling out everyone who even watched the show.

8

Ten years posting, and I’m still taken by surprise when people don’t get my humor.

Do people think I would really, seriously, straight faced, take them to task for watching a show that I am watching, without–literally–being forced to do so?

It’s no excuse, certainly, but you can actually take what I said as straight-faced literal, and not a sliver of crooked-grinned hyperbole? Seriously? Literally?

I just don’t think I can communicate as blandly un-humored as seems to be expected of my. I think, speak, and write with a sardonic tone. I always have, I can’t imagine that this will ever change. And still after 10 years here, people assume even my most transparently hyperbolic laff lines are deadly serious.

9

You came, not into a thread discussing Lost overall, but rather a specific point applicable to fans, and asked them all why they would watch if not forced. Stand alone, that is threadshitting. Even the second post still focuses on that you watch at someone else’s behest, rather than a “I know this show sucks, but I can’t tear myself away from watching.”

Both your first post and mswas’ posts were threadshitting. Tame threadshitting, as far as threadshitting goes, but still threadshitting.

ETA: And I agree, when you do talk about Verhoeven, you do get a section of threadshitters who seem intent on setting you off. Unfortunately, you sometimes comply.

10

Well, I did say humorous first. I kinda figured you wouldn’t keep watching if you thought it truly sucked.

I started watching the same way - after being cajoled by a friend endlessly. I started watching season 1 around late season 4 and finally caught up so I can watch this season live.

11

I’d say it is entirely up to the opinion of the mod that narrows the topic to silence discussion or calls threadshitting based on him being for or against the show himself. I will bet for instance a long gushy post about how all the Lost mysteries are so wonderful and have stimulated me for years (while naming none and not contributing to the thread) would similarly be modded right away if that mod did not like the show. Probably with a snarky remark about the brain of that viewer as well, and that he needs to accept other views to remain, of course, and be corrected. That is how it works here.

12

How’s that cross, SW? Comfortable up there?

lissener, you’ve got SW on your side now. Best to concede defeat quickly and move on.

13

Interesting point. Here are two hypothetical posts:

  1. The mystery I want solved is why this show sucks!

  2. The mystery I want solved is why this show is so great!

Are they both threadshitting? Neither addresses the OP, but example #1 does violate the OP’s explicit request not to bash or complain about the show.

14

They are both hijacking, but the first one is threadshitting due to the negative connotations.

15

True, Bearflag70, but it has been noted in other threads that the OP does not have full authority over a thread as conversation shifts over a number of posts. Asides and off-topic discussions occur all over the place, so unless an offender repeats and beats the same horse regardless of the thread, threads discussions tend to shift organically.

My guess is that (1) might get reported and maybe acted upon, while (2) would be left alone.

16

If the thread was a general discussion of Lost, your post would be fine, lissener. But the thread was about “What one “Lost” mystery do you most care about getting an explanation for?” Your answer was “how anyone can watch this tripe without being forced to promise to do so by a friend?” So it’s phrased politely, but it’s threadshitting. “I want them to solve the mystery of why this show sucks!” would have been threadshitting, too - it’s the same message.

17

OTOH, I have seen original posts that specifically seeked to avoid their thread heading in an undesired direction and have the request enforced. Both of these were controversial topics in IMHO, though, and specified “opinions only”.

18

There’s this thing in real life called tone. It has to do with the pitch, cadence and other qualities of the words you use that don’t actually encompass the words themselves. Because all writing is non-verbal, this quality cannot be transmitted across the internet. Most sarcasm/hyperbole is conveyed through tone. Thus, most people have a hard time picking up those things on the internet. The following smilies may help you fight the loss of tone: :);):D:p:rolleyes:

19

Just to acknowledge that I have seen and read this thread, basically, since my responses have been provided by others, viz:

Since the OP was very narrow and very specific, and your response was off topic; and since you, despite the OP’s specific request that people not indulge in Lost-bashing, said, basically “this show really sucks,” it was threadshitting. Please note, however, that there was no official warning issued – just a polite request that you refrain from doing so.

As to the separate but related issue (which you raised yourself) of why no one gets your sardonic sense of humor – dunno, but I’m tempted to go all Dr. Phil on you – “How’s that workin’ for you?” Maybe you should consider whether there might be another way of presenting yourself that would be as effective at getting your point across, but without all the the drama and conflict.

20

That would limit his ability to play the “poor, pitiful, misunderstood me” card.