*"**Hijacks. *This is, perhaps, the single largest and most important change to the rules in Great Debates and Politics and Elections made in 2020. Staying on topic is a strong goal of Great Debates and Politics and Elections moving forward. Threads exist for a reason. Presumably, the original poster wants to discuss a specific topic. Posts which pull the thread away from that topic are hijacks. Some of these are inadvertent, some are not. Posts that seem intended to steer a discussion away from the original topic may be sanctioned."
Yet, there are some threads that are being allowed to be completely derailed with no moderator action. One example would be the “Why are Trump defectors having little effect on Trump’s election chances?” That thread is currently 277 posts long at the moment, however, only the first hundred posts or so were actually about the original thread topic - Trump defectors and their effect on the upcoming November election. The remaining 170+ posts that followed completely derailed the thread into a different topic - a thread about poverty, racism, being black in America, mental handicaps, social inequality, etc.
Yes, I mean I think it should only be an issue if someone (principally the OP) objects and reports it. But if the original narrow topic has run its course and nobody objects, surely there’s no reason for a conversation not to broaden organically - within reason, and within forum parameters.
I disagree that the OP should be grated special privileges, especially with regard to topics of general interest (as opposed to say, discussion of the OP’s personal life, for example).
Topics will naturally drift somewhat from the original question or topic, which is not necessarily a bad thing.
When topics become pissing contests between posters in which a poster is either trying to trigger another with stupid one liners or trying to show “I’m smarter than you are” - that’s when it’s time to pull the curtains on the thread. But even then if it’s just one jackass poster derailing a thread, the Mods can deal with said jackass.
Yes, I agree. I didn’t mean to imply that the OP has any special right to determine what areas of discussion are relevant to the topic as stated, the mod should determine that.
I can’t speak for moderators, but I can speak for myself. I can also share this from the thread I made in January:
I’ve filed a couple reports, but not as many as I should.
Sometimes I’ve caught myself and explicitly made spin-off topics. Or asked others to followup in a new topic/private message. I can’t say I enjoy it, and I think it makes me look like I’m using bad-faith tactics to avoid answering direct questions.
In one instance I took an active hijack, which I was not yet participating in but found interesting, and copied the entire discussion to a new topic. In retrospect I probably shouldn’t have done that. I’m not a moderator and what I did looks a lot like moderating. Maybe I should have just reported it and moved on - but I did want to contribute to the discussion a little, which I did in the dedicated topic. I don’t think I bothered reporting this particular instance.
In my head, there was a bit of mental substitution:
Czarcasm writes: The question has to be asked in every [example-that-Velocity-thinks-is-a-hijack-with-no-moderator-action]: Has this hijack been reported to the Moderators?
Riemann writes: Yes, I mean I think [moderators-not-handling-hijacks] should only be an [issue-worthy-of-an-ATMB-topic] if someone (principally the [OP-of-the-ATMB-topic-in-this-case-Velocity]) objects and reports it. But if the original narrow [topic-Velocity-thinks-has-been-hijacked] has run its course and nobody objects, surely there’s no reason for [that] conversation not to broaden organically - within reason, and within forum parameters.
I got that the referent of “OP” was theoretically ambiguous. And I certainly wasn’t doubting the fact that you are capable of making weird assumptions.