The portion that replied to me clearly did not mention residuals at all whereas my “so join a union comment” was in direct response to a post on actors residuals.
Are you saying that had I expanded my “hijack” with more detail on residuals you think it would have been on-topic?
This is the clarity that I’m seeking from the moderators.
So everything that needed to be said was said between my two modnotes in that thread.
I posted this:
A few minutes later Loach replies to you.
I attached a Staff note to the post:
Please Do Not reply. Hijack has been ended, see Modnote above. {WE?}
Then you came along and replied to it. So I banned you from the thread as you were by far the prime reason I had to moderate the thread in the first place.
Please recall, you’re the one that widened the hijack to Pharma. You’re the one that replied to a post that was staff noted not to reply to it.
That is my last word on this subject.
It seems to me - but I could be wrong - that there is more tolerance for variances to an OP once a thread has been fully discussed and is kind of petering out than there is to variances introduced right off the bat before the stated OP is strictly adhered to and fully discussed. I’ve had to bite my tongue on occasion and wait 100 posts or so, or one has the choice of creating a new thread altogether.