Thankfully, you only have to worry about that version of the TOS if you hop into your time machine to post in the 20th century.
Around post 1397 in this thread about Harris’s VP pick, What Exit asked folk to please stop riffing on Big Lebowski.
I had not noticed any riffing coming anywhere close to derailing that thread or interfering with the conversation. I didn’t understand snowthx’s post, so I passed over it. I saw the photo of the actor, but I did not even think of it as a Lebowski reference - I just thought it was an actor who resembles Walz.
The thread now has shadowed banners over those 2 posts asking to stop the riffing. Those were latter additions, right? Because as they appear now, it sorta looks like ongoing requests were made and ignored. I’m not generally a big fan of “revising” what was previously written to reflect a later preference. I guess I understand correcting clear typos in a title or something…
Were there a series of flags from users? Or is this a mod doing what they believe is best for the board.
Of course, this is not at all a big thing. And I don’t want to suggest that I am not grateful for the hard work the mods put in. But this - and perhaps to action that gave rise to this thread - suggests to me that some mods might be keeping a tad too tight of a rein on some threads.
In ordinary conversations, people joke, and offer non sequiturs. Yet folk are able to continue to communicate effectively. Not meaning to insult the mods, but my impression is that some of you may be becoming a tad quick on the trigger. Unless I’m missing that my fellow posters have been becoming increasingly sensitive to such “interruptions” and desire more strictly confined threads.
There are a handful of threads I am trying to keep focused right now.
The VP thread and the Ukraine Invasion thread being the top 2.
The staff notes were added later, they were not ignored.
The joking posts were not hidden.
No one got in trouble.
I made a modnote to stop the joking exchange.
I added the staff notes as it is easy to respond to something in a thread before the modnote and in a fast moving thread, miss the modnote completely.
That is all.
I’m intensely grateful for the strict moderation in these sorts of threads.
It’s very irritating to see a ton of new posts in a current events thread, for example, and instead of getting updates on a new development seeing an extended back and forth over something completely irrelevant.
I understand.
I’m just offering my opinion that mods might be keeping things a tad too tight, and then as an explanation, saying how hard they work. I suspect I do not appreciate how much you do that is not readily apparent. And I tend to be a clumper as opposed to a splitter - preferring against multiple narrowly siloed threads. But, like I said - just offering my opinion/impression.
I made a comment using a Lebowski quote that I thought was relevant. It was correctly moderated because it would be easy to see others distracting from an interesting thread with similar quotes from a hilarious movie. It was not my intention to do that, but I agree with the moderation decision, and regret any potential for distraction.
In my non-mod opinion, three jokes spaced out weren’t distracting, so I wouldn’t have noted it yet. Maybe at 5 or 6? I’m not a mod and I don’t have to decide, so I can’t really criticize WE for deciding 3 was enough.
But once the decision was made, I absolutely appreciate him adding the banner over the older posts. It’s too easy to reply as you read and miss a later instruction (even though I of course would never do that).
This thread seems to have devolved into a discussion of how to pronounce one band’s name. Not a hijack? Or allowed b/c it is in a different forum? (I suspect some people might care more about music and art than they do politics.)
I guess I can grok the idea of the strict moderation of the breaking news threads (tho MPSIMS always seems a weird place for them.) But it just doesn’t make sense to me why there should be significantly different rules for the various forums. And since it doesn’t make sense to me, I tend to forget them.
What thread is that supposed to be?
Hah! Perfect mix of admonition and self-deprecating humor. That’s what nearly all modding would look like in a perfect world, IMHAIO (in my humble and irrelevant opinion).
On the issue of hijacking, personally I see a difference between a “hijack” that is really a related tangent, versus a true “oh look! shiny!” distraction.
For example, discussing whether Trump and Harris will/should debate seems like a reasonable extension of the topic, “Is Trump confused”? If he is, and he and/or his handlers know it, they’ll be very fearful of a direct matchup while the rest of us will salivate at the possibility of seeing it. That kind of hijack seems legit to me - if that sort of thing is not allowed, the thread is nothing but clip after clip of Trump slurring his words, which gets boring after a while.
On the other hand, if someone said in that thread, “His hair is oranger than usual, do you think he’s so demented he doesn’t even realize the color is wrong?” that comment isn’t off-topic to start with, but if someone responded, “I read that Clairol has changed some of their colors while keeping the old names” and then someone said, “Yeah but does Trump even dye his hair at home?” and then someone said “well his hairdresser might use Clairol” and someone said “yeah, my hairdresser used a Clairol dye last week and my hair came out so strange I had to color over the top with a different brand” … now THAT’s a hijack, because suddenly we are talking about Clairol, which is not even slightly related to Trump’s behavior.
Thank you!
I think part of the OP’s objection was he thought he was being talked to like an 8-year-old…
I asked some time ago, and i was told that a polite request to get back to the OP was okay.
I do have one request, however. If someone is the third or 4th poster in a hijack, please dont name just them. Either everyone or no one. Even if #3 is the one flagged.
Wrong on both counts. (bolding mine)