Some more than others, but we all do it at some time or another: post a comment that pushes a thread outside of its topic. Why?
Moderators try to shepherd us around, in order to keep some distinction between the forums and threads. We could just have a community like a cafe, a bar, or a social gathering where everyone is talking in one space whenever about whatever as it flits across their mind. That’s not what this board has been, but it could change. Should it?
Are we just getting too old to be able to stay on topic? Are we too accustomed to other social media where distinct categories is out of fashion?
Assuming we want to keep separate forums and threads, what do we as a community need to do?
About This Message Board is suppose to stay on-topic and not argue stuff from other threads, but moderation is light.
Crap hit reply too soon:
So what I think I’m saying is it is often hard to remember which forum you’re posting in or which rules apply. This is why, if the poster is not a serial hijacker, we try not to do more than a modnote and maybe hide the off-topic post or move a hijack to its own thread.
And remember: we encourage the sharing of anecdotes and opinions but as a new topic instead of a hijack.
If you are responding to something in a thread that is basically off-topic or likely to lead to a hijack, try this:
How to Reply as a linked Topic:
Click Reply, in the upper left corner of the reply window is the reply type button, looks like a curving arrow point to the right.
Choose Reply as linked topic and it starts a new thread. As an example, you can choose GD, IMHO or The Pit for it.
I find this to be one of the reasons. Some people have a particular hobby horse / axe to grind about a topic, and feel compelled to post about that in any thread even tangentially related to it.
I also see people who don’t realize (or forget) which forum that they are in, and post snarky or silly comments in threads in FQ or P&E.
Similarly, I see a lot of posts in which the poster just wants to share a personal anecdote, which is only vaguely related to the topic or question.
When I commit this peccadillo, it’s more because someone has written an on-topic post that happens to include a reference to something else – and I’m excited to share an idea about that, or just to acknowledge that we’re on the same wavelength.
After all, that’s how conversations go in real life, right? You’re talking with a friend about whatever; one of you says something “on topic,” but contains the seeds of another thing, and you respond to that. The conversation shifts. No problem! If some “mod” came over and told you both to get back to the “OP,” you’d slap them in the face, and rightly so.
So, fundamentally this is about “forgetting” (at certain moments) that this message board simulates real life conversations in many ways, but that’s illusory. Not a big deal. Understandable. I appreciate the efforts and patience of the mods, for (usually gently) reminding us of the distinction.
I’ve gotten pushback in threads because I actually posted about what the OP had said rather than the hijack that shifted the topic. It was as if I had hijacked their conversation.
Many threads go on long after the initial topic has been exhausted. Once people get into a subject they’re reluctant to let it go. Usually that’s fine; similar or adjacent topics emerge and new interest sparks. But I’ve seen any number of threads that I had posted in continue on and on until I wonder what possibly could be left to say.
Psychology pulled out of my ass: I think people have become less inclined to start new threads and are more comfortable to return to older ones just to be part of the - ever-diminishing - mass. New threads are lonely places. All the omnibus threads reinforce this theory. So does the mods inclination to keep breaking news threads to news rather than analysis. If people don’t want to separate from a good conversation to start a new one with less return, they will try to post in the original whether the mods consider it off-topic or not.
These are generalizations, of course, more of a perceived trend than a statistical conclusion. The more recent trend to split off posts into a new thread may help counteract it. Or just annoy people. We’re an ornery bunch.
What seems like a logical connection in my own head is sometimes not a logical connection for other people. Changing subject matter on a dime is often how my brain naturally works, so I don’t tend to question it when it’s happening.
The other reason a thread tends to hijack is because once a poster makes an error, other Dopers can’t help but jump in to correct that error. But the very act of correcting tends to lead the whole thread wildly off topic.
For instance, maybe an award-winning chef is from Palestine. And then there’s a thread about him in Cafe Society. And then someone makes a comment about his background, wrongly claiming his family was killed in an Israeli airstrike or whatnot, and then before you know it, a thread about hummus and falafel goes into the whole Israel-Palestine quarrel.
I prefer referee - we make calls based on what we see, and (for the most part) good calls, even if there is disagreement. You folks aren’t sheep, and don’t need a shepherd, but you do need a good ref! Feel free to consider yourself pro-players if you like.
@Velocity - I do agree that there are some posters who are passionate about their POV, and sometimes push it into inappropriate discussions. Almost all who do so, I judge do so in good faith not as an intent, but sometimes the effects are the same. But, and tying to your later point, there are (and always have been) certain hot-button topics that people are so heavily vested in, that they will jump on any tiny connection to bring it up. Still not saying bad faith, but the tunnel vision is real and they will NOT give it up. Two specific ones being firearms (pro/con), Israel/Palestine, but also Politics in general.
Anyway, to add to @What_Exit’s good points, there are a LOT of people who, due to the nature of the board and threads, loose track of which forum they’re in, and that’s absolutely a big issue. In saner times, I’d be more worried about the trend, but … this is a semi-unique era for the USA, and certainly the most so in my lifetime (others, well, you’ve seen closer matches than I have).
Also, and strictly IMHO, there’s been a semi-recent trend with picking forums to try to control the topic that may not fully work. NOTE - I’m not saying people are gaming the system, but they want a certain type of discussion that doesn’t quite match the selected forum. We’ve had fairly political threads started in FQ because the OP didn’t want speculation - they wanted to know points of the actual law, but that can get into the weeds pretty quickly. Not sure I have a good fix for that other than being quite careful in writing your OPs. The more we know of the intent, the better we can do in trying to keep it on track!
It’s a bit more work, and I’d prefer if a poster created a new thread, to which I can move stuff. My titles are sometimes rough, and I may not preserve the nuance, but I can and will do it - but mostly if the sidetrack seems to be viable on it’s own. The recent Solid State Battery discussion was a good example - the initial post was on track for the Carney thread, but the next dozen posts were all (good) discussion about the battery/newly emerging tech and really didn’t have anything to do with the actual thread. So a pretty easy call to split.
The moderators do a reasonably good job of moving threads where they go, as the conversation develops.
A recent thread about double trigger gun safties started, I think, in GQ and was eventually moved to IMHO where people who wanted to continue talking about guns were free to do so. I think that thread is still going strong, as it should.
The over-riding rule for this message board used to be “Don’t be a Jerk” Somewhere in all the endless rules, that has been forgotten. Let the conversations develope, that is what used to make this board an interesting place.
That’s me. I post a lot on this board, but start relatively few threads.
The other thing is that all of us are here because we enjoy communicating with others. I’m guilty of going off-topic sometimes because the discussion triggers something I’d like to say, and I’ll go ahead and say it even if it’s not precisely on topic. Sometimes rum is involved.
My issue is when discussing X, some poster posts a false statement about Y- which means i just have to correct that. This occurred in the worst president thread, but IIRC that really was sorta on point.
I believe in GD and P&E, making false statements in not against the rules. Only in GQ. So, why bother them with extra flags they wont do anything about?
