Seriously, “shame on you” for people not realizing which of the many, many topics about Trump they were in when they responded to the previous poster? I hope it was written as a joke. Clearly, as shown by how many posters didn’t realize it, it’s easy to do when you’re responding to a post.
The title of the thread is in big letters at the top. It’s easy to glance to see if a post is on topic or not.
We are trying to get people to pay attention. We spend way too much of our time moving posts and creating threads because people just won’t.
I was not joking. Please note this is one of the few things we ask of posters in our rules.
Thank you for handling that mess. I’ve been busy a good chunk of the day and as I was getting ready to look into that flag, I saw you were working on it. I was not following that thread at all.
It did seem like a large off-topic hijack of a thread. So I will use my macro again:
If you are responding to something in a thread that is basically off-topic or likely to lead to a hijack, try this:
How to Reply as a linked Topic:
Click Reply, in the upper left corner of the reply window is the reply type button, looks like a curving arrow point to the right.
Choose Reply as linked topic and it starts a new thread. As an example, you can choose GD, IMHO or The Pit for it.
That is actually the best method.
In post 1350 of https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-trump-confused/996589/1350]this thread, Aspenglow shut down a hijack. The thread was started in January and is titled “Is Trump Confused?” I had not been following the thread much, and am not sure what caught my attention recently, but someone posted about Trump saying he won’t debate Harris as scheduled. Several folk responded about the debate.
In her post, Aspenglow wrote:
First, was the transgression so significant - in a 1300 post 8 month old thread - to warrant quoting as many offenders as Aspenglow did? Heck, I didn’t appreciate that there was such a tight discussion going on in that thread that the posts about the debate were going to take it off the rails, but not my call.
But more significantly, “Shame on us?!”
I know that it can often be challenging to precisely discern tone from a text post, and I hope I missed something other than I perceive. But IMO accusations of “shame” are more suited from a parent towards a misbehaving child, or to someone who has betrayed some basic principles of trust or ethics. Maybe to a pet that misbehaved…
So no, I feel no shame for responding to a series of posts and not realizing they did not fit perfectly in the narrow boundaries of a thread.
You also didn’t notice that someone else has already started an ATMB thread on this.
Snark much? Maybe I was taking a whopping 6 minutes (the time between our posts) to try to compose something that was not poorly written.
Shame on you!
No snark was intended. It was an observation of fact.
I understood some might take offense at my choice of words. You have no idea how frustrating it is to continually run across this concern when it’s the first rule of GD/P&E. Most of our moderating time is spent in these two forums around hijacking.
My hope is that maybe now we’ve got your attention and the problem will abate somewhat.
I sympathize. But I’ll assert my view that the anti-hijacking rule is more trouble than it’s worth.
I don’t blame the mods for trying to enforce the rule. But perhaps we should discuss changing the rule.
Of course, and ideally that’s what happens. But when responding to a notification, it’s really easy to overlook the thread title and just look at what you’re responding to. Nobody’s doing it deliberately to make the mods angry. None of the people responding in that thread are posters with previous posting problems. That alone shows how easy it is to do by mistake.
Yeah, you got my attention. But likely not in the manner you wish.
Hard disagree. I like how focused the GD and P&E threads can be. It’s frustrating when you have a killer argument that metaphorically destroys your debate opponent, only to have it get lost in an array of distracting, off-topic stuff.
Not that I ever have those killer arguments, but some day!
Seriously, though, this place stays interesting to me because of the tight moderation in GD and P&E.
I’m completely fine with that and have in fact encouraged posters to do this if they want a change to the rules. Each time it’s been discussed, the general consensus has been to keep things as they are.
Everyone has a different opinion about how much hijacking should be “acceptable.” I have repeatedly said that my tolerance ends after about 10 posts that are not on topic. I won’t speak for other mods about their tolerances. We do try for consistency as much as possible.
Actually, as someone who used to moderate a message board that was a lot less mature, on the whole, than this one, I do have an idea of how frustrating moderating can be and how different things look when you’re responsible for moderating, not just participating. But I also understand that when one is a moderator, one should try to moderate one’s language - hey, it’s right there in the name!
“Shame on you” is the kind of wording you use with children who have committed a moral infraction. We’re not children, nor did anyone’s error sink to the level of a shameful act.
"Nice anti-hijacking rule you got there. Be a shame if something were to happen to it "
First, was the transgression so significant - in a 1300 post 8 month old thread - to warrant quoting as many offenders as Aspenglow did? Heck, I didn’t appreciate that there was such a tight discussion going on in that thread that the posts about the debate were going to take it off the rails, but not my call.
I am a regular reader of the thread in question, and I did flag the hijack. (I doubt I was the only one.) What difference does it make how old the thread is, or how many posts are in it? It was still a viable thread on an interesting topic. It is fricking annoying to open a post to read about one thing, and find it completely taken over by something not remotely related to it.
You don’t need to be ashamed, but you do need to be aware that you (all of you, not just Dinsdale) were needlessly making the SDMB experience less pleasant for others.
If everyone’s huff has been aroused due to my choice of words intended to get your attention, I have no problem apologizing for that.
I apologize for saying, “Shame on you.”
As someone who was a moderator in another forum, how would you suggest we get the attention of others with respect to this ongoing issue? If we just keep moving posts and creating threads, then all that does is create more work for mods.
How do we get posters to learn to create new threads in GD/P&E instead of hijacking them?
That was a mild rebuke. It’s an uphill battle against the perceived hijacks. But instant ear worm for the song Shame shame shame
Good on you. Maybe mention as much in the other thread as well? (And no, I didn’t check it to see if you already have.)
I don’t perceive the hijacking issue as significant - or at least in the same way - the mods and some folk do. So I don’t have suggestions for how to address a “problem” I do not perceive.
One poster above saw fit to flag it. Their call. Maybe if this were a thread I were especially interested in, I might feel the same.
Thank you, apology accepted. And I apologize for my role in creating and sustaining the hijack.
As to advising on “getting people’s attention,” I can’t help much with that because my heart isn’t in it - I personally am not nearly as concerned with hijacks as the official policy of this board is. But I guess you’ll just have to keep plugging away at the effort.
I will say that in my moderating experience, although “over the top” language can be a great tool to make people listen, it’s best done with humor and/or self deprecation, not by scolding.