Absolutely. I’d ideally see something like five moderators in each forum. But we currently see maybe two or three active mods per forum. And then some mods have duties in multiple forums. If I were the manager, I’d worry about burnout.
I was likely bored, and clicked on a thread that I ordinarily wouldn’t. I had checked it long ago, and personally was not interested in the posting of whatever gaffes people perceived. (I had long wondered why such a pissy thread warranted remaining open in P&E, but not my call.) Like I said, I assume I was bored and opened the thread. Much to my surprise, I saw several posts that were at least modestly interesting, such that I posted a one line response to the last several posts I had read.
When I did so, I assume I was thinking solely about the recent posts I had read, and had not recalled the thread title. Or, possibly I thought the posting of gaffes was not of such import that the discussion of debate was a horrible digression. As noted, no one interested in the gaffes saw fit to say, “Hey, guys - get a room!”
You may not “get” that, but that is how this reasonably sentient person - who is not a mod and who is not terribly technology adept - committed the action you saw fit to shame and call out by name.
Yes, I understand that. Which is why I am apologizing for hijacking and will try not to do it again. My only point was that it’s hard to give advice to help someone implement a rule one doesn’t particularly feel enthusiasm for, that’s all.
Indeed. I do not remember ever being bothered in the slightest by a hijack. Will try harder not to hijack.
When responding to a notification, I generally check what thread it’s in and then go to my last read post in that thread and read anything that intervened between that and the post that caused the notification; and for that matter since that post.
This also prevents missing mod notes.
You don’t perceive that it causes a problem for “some folk”, even though you just said that it does? Or you think that you’re the only one entitled to decide what’s a “problem”?
Isn’t that junior modding?
And, as I’ve seen people mention in their hijacking posts that their own post is a hijack, I’m dubious that mentioning it does anything to stop it.
I do think I am the only one entitled to decide what MY perceptions are. Sorry you read my post other than as it was intended.
Been answered already, if you finished reading the thread.
Game, set, and match.
Oops, I didn’t intend that to be so snarky. Sorry about that, @thorny_locust .
That’s OK.
I had finished reading the thread; but left that in there, because it’s one reason I rarely call out hijacks in the thread. And it didn’t seem to me that the thread answered it clearly – apparently the specific wording of pointing out that it’s a hijack matters.
Sometimes the posts smack of snark or verges on insulting. Those are the ones that get modnoted. The examples given in this thread usually don’t. I’m sure there have been exceptions, but not lately at least.
The one other exception I can think of is someone that kept posting a friendly request like that. The modnote was something like ‘once is OK, 3 times is Jr. Modding, please leave it to the regular non-professionals.’
I have suggested before–with a large, but maybe not total degree of seriousness–that we start companion threads for those threads that have a lot of hijacks.
The point would be to have a dedicated companion thread for all the hijacks and tangents and thus, wouldn’t have moderators needing to encourage folks to start new threads for each and every single little tangent in the main thread. Because that would be waaaaay too many threads.
Something like this already happens. Sort of. Sometimes. I think both the war in Ukraine and the Gaza situation each have several threads that are close to the same discussion except the added, newer threads are more open and free-flowing, a lot of times because they’re in the Pit.
The Pit is an interesting place because sometimes it has the best thread discussions–the best give-and-take & back-and-forth because it’s not heavily moderated.
FWIW, I would personally support relaxation of hijacking once we get to a certain post count. I like to think of these as conversations, and in real life that’s how conversations go.
Thanks. I’m embarrassed to say that, even though I’ve been here a long time, I have committed this sin and have known about the proper method you have described. Will do from now on!
That is what I tried to convey by mentioning the thread length (in posts and time.) IMO, even 30 posts off topic over a couple of days were essentially a blip, and unlikely to derail a 1300 post, 8 month thread.
It coulda easily been brought back on track by the multitude who were apparently concerned with maintaining a pristine, laser-focused thread. But they didn’t.
Obviously many folk - and the mods - feel differently. Not a big deal to me whether hijacks are shut down or not.
No. The onus is on posters to stay on topic, not on readers.
I don’t want to be corrected for inappropriateness, so I am addressing your post, and not you. Your post suggests to me an attitude of someone who wishes to be spoonfed without exerting the minimal effort that would be involved in typing as much as “Please keep on topic.”
Sure, in a perfect world everyone would behave perfectly. But in a conversation - or just about any mutual interaction - when one mildly missteps, what “onus” is there on the other participants to maintain the interaction?
This is where our views differ: there is no mutual interaction. My participation on this board is almost entirely reading, not posting. For me, most threads are like a large auditorium with some interesting speakers on stage, while I am in the audience listening.
If you’re participating in a community that has a certain set of standards which you have agreed to abide by, the onus is on you to abide by them.
Is the 1999 TOS from when I signed up still available?