Surely you mean a modnote as almost no warnings have been issued in those threads. Try not to be overly dramatic please. At worse, you would draw a modnote and I would hide the post under a details spoiler.
If you repeatedly link to clearly faulty “news items” you would be told to stop and if you persisted, thread banned. If you kept posting off-topic speculation you would be told to stop and then maybe thread banned.
The threads have been running over a year now (sadly for Ukraine) and 2 posters have been thread banned and that is all. I think someone just got a warning for ignoring a modnote, but I wasn’t even around for that. I was at my late-mother’s viewing.
As to the current drift off-topic or not, I’ll check that a little later when I’m more awake.
No, I meant a warning: I truly didn’t know whether it could draw one in the wake of existing modnotes, or whether it could draw a modnote of its own, or whether it’d be an unobjectionable and on-topic response.
Fair enough. The confusion/frustration with “how much discussion counts as a hijack” seems greater to me than it apparently seems to you, but it’s not worth a fuss.
Well, to continue that hijack … (sorry, couldn’t resist)
… a chicken&waffles diversion is annoying but pretty harmless. But the problem with a more political hijack is that it’s often a take over of a serious thread.
Usually someone with one view on one detail and canNOT let it go. That gets compounded by some of the people here who just have to reply over and over to the hijacker and canNOT let it go (see a pattern?).
So, if a poster could just say “Well, there’s this tangential point…” and just leave it, it’d keep the discussions here moving along. But when they act like [recently-banned poster] and derail a thread for days, then I think mods need to step in. But the other half of that is that other posters need to stop refuting every little non-fact and giving those interrupters SO much attention.