off-topic sub-threads

just when has a thread gone "off-topic"?

the problem with saying a forum-thread has gone "off-topic" just because the last few posts have been "off-topic" misses the point that threads become multi-threaded (they just don't get marked as separate threads).

threads aren't linear. the last post doesn't always relate to the post just before it.

closing a thread (or threatening action against a thread) just because some of the sub-threads have gone "off-topic" is stupid.

some of the sub-threads are still topical. but some may not be. closing a thread on the basis of the "off-topic" sub-threads kills the conversation in the still topical sub-threads.

in fact that has been a tactic to stiffle some conversation - if someone adds enough off-topic material to a thread the thread will close. this effectively silences the orginal conversation.

not to mention that the "off-topic" sub-threads are often quite amusing... which means they often get more energy applied to them. however, just because a majority of a thread has its energy in "off-topic" sub-threads doesn't mean the original conversation isn't continuing.

You forgot to make this a poll with a pie option.

are polls toys or tools? I rarely see them used in a serious way.

oh, I hope my off-topic sub-thread doesn't get this thread closed!

I do agree we need a pie option.

If post are not expected to have any relevancy to the posts that preceded them why bother having separate threads at all?

Just have a chat room with all posts listed in order of time posted in one big heap; if a totally free form, unfocused set of statements is what is deemed good, that's the way to do it.

On the other hand, one could take the first listed goal of the Community Standards seriously and attempt to treat each other with respect, specifically to respect the threadstarter's desire to have a discussion on a topic they felt was distinctive enough from existing threads to warrant starting a new thread.

I don't think it's disrespectful to think people are capable of operating the scroll wheel on their mouse and that they're smart enough to do so when they're not interested in some of the posts in a thread. (Okay, well I suppose maybe that's disrespectful of mac users who don't have a scroll wheel and have to actually reach all the way over to the scroll bar.)

I agree with StoneSelf on this one. Just because threads often veer off in several different directions doesn't mean that the main topic has died, but if no one posts anything on the actual topic for many hours it's probably safe to assume that it's not going to get back on track. I personally think that if the majority of posts are on topic and it hasn't devolved into a slugfest then it shouldn't be moved or closed.

* veers off into rant about Macs *

what is the purpose of threads?

why would a person start a new thread?

why is considered extemely easy to scroll past posts that make it difficult to maintain a coherent train of discourse, but overly burdensome for someone who wants to talk about something off topic to start their own thread?

that's the wrong question. it presupposes that i think post are not expected to have any relevancy to the posts that preceded them.

my point is that the person who starts a thread has no control over the following posts. should that person and those conversing with the thread-starter be penalized because others have decided to start a sub-thread?

Because most subtopics in threads are just quips or sidebars that really don't warrant a full thread. They're usually better off in the context in which they arose, as added flavor, interjected humor, or what have you. We'd miss out on a lot of interesting discourse if it was verboten to veer off on tangents.

Conversation is not meand to be so rigid as to not allow for flexibility of digressing and going off topic from time to time. Focusing in an anal retentive mannner on keeping everything precise and in the rules and by the letter does not take into account normal human behavior. As long as the thread is not totally derailed, many threads have a natural progression into some off topic conversation. Humor is often interjected into tense threads, and sometimes something someone says will spark a tangent. Threads are a conversation - a slow motion one, but still a conversation. They have a natural flow all their own - worrying too much about the direction is pointless as they tend to be self-correcting - they ultimately die of irrelevance or a natural death as they run their course.

These aren't conversations, these are product discussion forums for a software company.

People who want to chat should use a chat room.

The purpose of having forums broken up into seperate threads with titles is to have orderly conversations about topics; in the case of these forums, topics that concern Second Life virtual environment.

discussion, conversation, tomato

btw one of the theoretical products of sl is community.

How many times do you wash your hands in a given day?

This is a DISCUSSION forum. A discussion is a conversation, and a discussion can digress from time to time. These are not formal timed debates with a set of rigid rules that must be adhered to, they are discussions about SL. The medium is different than a chat room, but in the end, they are still simply a conversation about a particular issue. Having off topic posts within a thread is not some aggregious disrespect to the original topic poster, nor is it even remotely an issue of any importance. If a moderator determines the thread has gone too far awry, then so be it, but amateur arm-chair moderation is certainly not particularly appealing.

Did Linden Lab have a website and forums before they actually got the virtual reality up and running?

How did they find people? Where did they advertise for members at? Does anyone have any of those old ads?

In a genuine, realtime conversation, the sound waves do not persiist, a humorous aside might produce a moment of smirking and the conversation returns to the previous topic. New arrivals at that point aren't able to cause an increasing divergence from the point of the converstion by amplifying the humorous aside because they didnt' and can't hear it.

When large bodies of people attempt to have real conversations that are orderly and useful they frequently take on of two paths to this goal: they implement rules of conduct such as Robert's Rules of Order, or they break up into subgroups. If the subgroups themselves are large enough to be unweidly, those might be broken up into sub-sub-groups.

Breaking up into subgroups is somewhat like breaking up into Scripting Tips, Design, etc. Sub-Sub-Groups are threads.

If you are at a meeting that has broken into subgroups, one for Scripting Tips and one for Design, and you go to the Scripting Tips group and insist on talking not about design but about the price of eggs or what kind of condiments you like on your burgers you aren't displaying a worthwhile freedom and sponaneity in your actions, you are just making life difficult for the people who split up into groups in order to have focused conversations on particular topics.

even so... should people who are on topic suffer because some people are off-topic?

i wash my hands four to five times in a day. is that compulsive?

No, that is not compulsive at all.

The number of times a person should or might be expected to wash their hands per day depends a great deal on what typed of activities they are engaged in.

A mechanic who gets his hand quite greasy in the course of his work might need to wash his hands quite frequently for purely functional reasons; the probably of knucklebusters happening as a result of a hand slipping off a wrench to which a great deal of torque is being applied will be highly dependent on the amount of grease on the mechanic's hands.

A doctor who, even though he would most likely be wearing gloves, comes into the vicinity of an abnormally high percentage of people with a contagious disease should be washing her hands very often.

People in the food preparation industry likewise should wash their hands very often for health reasons.

This is a fascinating subject you have brought up and I hope that it can be discussed at great length in minute detail.

Delete the off topic posts, advise those who stray from the topic to start their own threads if there is not an existing thread already started on the subject they wish to discuss.

Those who wish to engage in a freeform, random, unfocused style of forum use need only get twenty people to join a group and ask to have a forum created; then they can ramble on incoherently to their heart's delight.

But then they would be deprived of the joy of preventing people from starting topics and having sensible courteous discussions about the subject the threadstarter had in mind, so I guess that would take all the fun out it, since it wouldn't be annoying people or breaking rules or etiquette customs.

You're posting this from the sink right now, aren't you?

No, I am posting this from my exercise bike.

ah ha...

please don't stray from the topic...

why not?

There are no correct topics, anything can follow anything in any order or no order at random.

Just the requirement or expectation that one write words in sequences intended to convey meaning is an authoritarian imposition on free will. We should be be able to just press keys at random.

It would really be a lot more spontaneous and free form if the compose a post and click submit practice was done away with. Better, less orderly, less concerned with meaning and structure and purpose would be a keystroke by keystroke entry system, each individuals user's separate keystrokes should be entered as they arrived. This would properly reflect the dynamic nature of the actual input.

I was of course right on topic, I was asked about where I was posting from, and I answered with a comment about exercise bikes, and it would be real nice and in keeping with the hey you don't need to stop on topic lets just say anything at any time, this is just a place to have conversations at, not a place to talk about Second Life way of looking at things if you could find it in you to say at least a few words about the then current topic, which is exercise bikes.

Mine makes too much noise. Do you have one?