It would appear that we've reached a point where the majority of threads that require locking or pruning, require locking or pruning by a small faction of repeat offenders. Given the absence of negative repercussions for taking threads off-course (other than the drop in the user's post count, which isn't so much a slap on the wrist as a soft summer breeze on the wrist), would it make sense to implement some? It wouldn't have to be severe (say, 10 posts that result in pruning or locking would earn a warning, with a very gradual slope up to a temporary ban), but it'd be better than no deterrent at all.
It depends on how it's being taken off-course. Often, something on topic will be posted that can cause things to derail (I'm guilty of this one), such as a thread about new construction having a post about environmental impacts, which then morphs into a climate change debate. Then there are the "somewhat on topic but trying to make an unrelated point" and the total non sequiturs that are much more of a problem.
And then there's the undead stock market thread that keeps coming back.
And then there are the "I'm trying to get this thread locked" posts, such as one near the end of the DST thread and several of former dzlsabe's threads.
----
Looking at the most recent locked threads that aren't labeled "moved":
[I spent a lot of time compiling a list of all the problematic posts in controversial threads, but I decided to remove it, as it could have caused another derail.]
What exactly is "thread-jacking"? Many threads harmlessly mutate away from their original focus, such as the "Minimum flight distance" thread in Travel.
I can't see implementing something like this as doing anything besides generating more controversy and complaints of "heavy-handed moderation."
Quote from: oscar on January 26, 2019, 08:42:45 PM
What exactly is "thread-jacking"?
In this case, steering the conversation towards controversial topics in a non-controversial thread.
Quote from: 1 on January 26, 2019, 08:41:24 PMIt depends on how it's being taken off-course. Often, something on topic will be posted that can cause things to derail (I'm guilty of this one), such as a thread about new construction having a post about environmental impacts, which then morphs into a climate change debate.
But that's the thing: It's entirely possible to discuss construction of a new road without foaming at the mouth about environmental concerns or local politicians or the legal system. The problem is the one individual going "well it would have been built already/would never have been built if it wasn't for those meddling Xs!"
I think it would be difficult to devise a rule that would be clear, simple, and difficult to game. In many of the problem threads it is intuitively simple to recognize the bad actor, but not to explain how what he or she is doing is causing agita. And we have had a few threads where two people firmly committed to civility got thoroughly at loggerheads, resulting in page after page of polite but unproductive discussion--I was guilty of this in a thread dealing with exit numbering in New York.
We're definitely trending toward minimizing the number of warnings and bans we give. We know who the usual suspects are and sometimes we just have to remind them they're getting out of line. It adds flavor to the discussion.
Quote from: J N Winkler on January 26, 2019, 09:20:13 PM
I think it would be difficult to devise a rule that would be clear, simple, and difficult to game. In many of the problem threads it is intuitively simple to recognize the bad actor, but not to explain how what he or she is doing is causing agita. And we have had a few threads where two people firmly committed to civility got thoroughly at loggerheads, resulting in page after page of polite but unproductive discussion--I was guilty of this in a thread dealing with exit numbering in New York.
I think there's a clear difference between, say, "I support free lunch programs for kindergarteners" and "Anyone who opposes free lunch programs for kindergarteners sucks ass." And shoehorning either or both of the above into a thread about whether Northwest Airlines was better when they were known as Northwest Orient is wholly unnecessary.
Quote from: Alps on January 26, 2019, 09:25:30 PM
We're definitely trending toward minimizing the number of warnings and bans we give. We know who the usual suspects are and sometimes we just have to remind them they're getting out of line.
And you think yelling "Stop, or I'll yell stop again!" is an effective deterrent?
Quote from: abefroman329 on January 26, 2019, 10:10:54 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 26, 2019, 09:25:30 PM
We're definitely trending toward minimizing the number of warnings and bans we give. We know who the usual suspects are and sometimes we just have to remind them they're getting out of line.
And you think yelling "Stop, or I'll yell stop again!" is an effective deterrent?
They tend to calm down when we tell them they're out of line. We're not talking trolls here.
I would rather not make moderation stricter. I think that threads going off topic isn't such a big deal and I think that locking and moving on is the best strategy.
I personally think people yelling for threads to be locked are worse than threads going off topic.
If someone wants to contribute to a topic that has been derailed, then just contribute. Often that'll bring the talk back to the subject. People yelling to get a topic locked or stating 'in before locked' aren't doing anything to help.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 27, 2019, 01:11:13 AM
I personally think people yelling for threads to be locked are worse than threads going off topic.
Me too, I just use the "report to mod" feature.
And I don't think this place is over-moderated at all, despite the incessant whining of some (well, one). Under-moderated fora are cesspools.
Looks like the other similar thread was deleted.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 27, 2019, 10:53:33 AM
Looks like the other similar thread was deleted.
What other similar thread?
Quote from: abefroman329 on January 27, 2019, 10:56:48 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 27, 2019, 10:53:33 AM
Looks like the other similar thread was deleted.
What other similar thread?
I don't remember what it was called, but I posted in it asking about NE2. It was up a little this morning.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 27, 2019, 11:49:25 AM
Quote from: abefroman329 on January 27, 2019, 10:56:48 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 27, 2019, 10:53:33 AM
Looks like the other similar thread was deleted.
What other similar thread?
I don't remember what it was called, but I posted in it asking about NE2. It was up a little this morning.
It was this thread. The posts got deleted at my request.
Quote from: 1 on January 27, 2019, 11:53:28 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 27, 2019, 11:49:25 AM
Quote from: abefroman329 on January 27, 2019, 10:56:48 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 27, 2019, 10:53:33 AM
Looks like the other similar thread was deleted.
What other similar thread?
I don't remember what it was called, but I posted in it asking about NE2. It was up a little this morning.
It was this thread. The posts got deleted at my request.
Yeah, it quickly went downhill once other members were mentioned.
Conversation drift happens in real life. Why shouldn't it happen here?
Clearly we need a new smiley for use in these situations:
(https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/hijack.gif)
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 27, 2019, 01:24:20 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 27, 2019, 11:53:28 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 27, 2019, 11:49:25 AM
Quote from: abefroman329 on January 27, 2019, 10:56:48 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 27, 2019, 10:53:33 AM
Looks like the other similar thread was deleted.
What other similar thread?
I don't remember what it was called, but I posted in it asking about NE2. It was up a little this morning.
It was this thread. The posts got deleted at my request.
Yeah, it quickly went downhill once other members were mentioned.
Protip: don't mention other members.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 27, 2019, 04:12:08 PM
Clearly we need a new smiley for use in these situations:
(https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/hijack.gif)
How did you get that smiley?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 27, 2019, 06:19:09 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 27, 2019, 04:12:08 PM
Clearly we need a new smiley for use in these situations:
(https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/hijack.gif)
How did you get that smiley?
It's on another forum of which I'm a member, so earlier today when I had my PC turned on I copied the image URL and then pasted it here wrapped with IMG tags.
The vast majority of "threadjackings" aren't even threadjacking. They're just meandering conversation that started off related to the original topic.
To quote a recent example, on the Arizona DDI (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=24315.0) thread, I brought up the signs at the interchange in question, which are to be replaced as part of the construction project. The signs are heavily based on British roundabout signs. As someone who is always saddened by the disappearance of an unusual sign, I felt the need to bring them up. All subsequent posts were about the signs in my post, and not the DDI itself. To someone who was just scrolling through, my post looks like a jacking of the original topic, as I made almost no mention of the new DDI. But, my post does have roots in the original topic: the signs wouldn't be going away if Arizona weren't modifying the interchange. All someone has to do is read backwards to find the source of the apparently-off-topic discussion.
If we are to define what is "off-topic" (which is the only way to acceptably moderate "threadjackings"), there needs to be a definition for "on-topic". As that is, realistically, impossible, I don't think the moderators need to do anything more than what they are doing now. Hell, is there even such a thing as "threadjacking"? I can't recall ever seeing a post that wasn't at least partly in response to something prior to it.
Quote from: jakeroot on January 27, 2019, 06:47:34 PM
I can't recall ever seeing a post that wasn't at least partly in response to something prior to it.
I've seen it a few times.
Quote from: 1 on January 27, 2019, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 27, 2019, 06:47:34 PM
I can't recall ever seeing a post that wasn't at least partly in response to something prior to it.
I've seen it a few times.
No kill I.
Quote from: hbelkins on January 27, 2019, 03:01:58 PM
Conversation drift happens in real life. Why shouldn't it happen here?
Back in the days of BBSes, we called it Topic Drift...
Quote from: jakeroot on January 27, 2019, 06:47:34 PM
The vast majority of "threadjackings" aren't even threadjacking. They're just meandering conversation that started off related to the original topic.
To quote a recent example, on the Arizona DDI (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=24315.0) thread, I brought up the signs at the interchange in question, which are to be replaced as part of the construction project. The signs are heavily based on British roundabout signs. As someone who is always saddened by the disappearance of an unusual sign, I felt the need to bring them up. All subsequent posts were about the signs in my post, and not the DDI itself. To someone who was just scrolling through, my post looks like a jacking of the original topic, as I made almost no mention of the new DDI. But, my post does have roots in the original topic: the signs wouldn't be going away if Arizona weren't modifying the interchange. All someone has to do is read backwards to find the source of the apparently-off-topic discussion.
If we are to define what is "off-topic" (which is the only way to acceptably moderate "threadjackings"), there needs to be a definition for "on-topic". As that is, realistically, impossible, I don't think the moderators need to do anything more than what they are doing now. Hell, is there even such a thing as "threadjacking"? I can't recall ever seeing a post that wasn't at least partly in response to something prior to it.
Yeah, the stock market thread got off topic because stocks are inherently political.
I think the solution is to topic ban him from inserting politics into threads. The restriction does not apply if previous posts or the thread itself was already political.
Quote from: 1 on January 27, 2019, 10:36:53 PM
I think the solution is to topic ban him from inserting politics into threads. The restriction does not apply if previous posts or the thread itself was already political.
Aren't politics already banned/discouraged?
Quote from: 1 on January 27, 2019, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 27, 2019, 06:47:34 PM
I can't recall ever seeing a post that wasn't at least partly in response to something prior to it.
I've seen it a few times.
My fondest example of this has nothing to do with this forum. My parents and extended family were eating dinner at a restaurant. A few of us were talking about something (Let's say, sports). My mom, always trying to insert herself into every conversation, suddenly blurts out "My favorite channel is the Weather Channel!" We laughed hysterically, not only because she admits that without a second though, but our conversation had absolutely nothing to do with weather or tv!
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 28, 2019, 08:16:52 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 27, 2019, 10:36:53 PM
I think the solution is to topic ban him from inserting politics into threads. The restriction does not apply if previous posts or the thread itself was already political.
Aren't politics already banned/discouraged?
Doesn't stop some people.
Quote from: US71 on January 28, 2019, 08:42:51 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 28, 2019, 08:16:52 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 27, 2019, 10:36:53 PM
I think the solution is to topic ban him from inserting politics into threads. The restriction does not apply if previous posts or the thread itself was already political.
Aren't politics already banned/discouraged?
Doesn't stop some people.
Such as a comment about building a wall that used to be reply #8 in this thread.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 28, 2019, 09:32:31 AM
Quote from: US71 on January 28, 2019, 08:42:51 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 28, 2019, 08:16:52 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 27, 2019, 10:36:53 PM
I think the solution is to topic ban him from inserting politics into threads. The restriction does not apply if previous posts or the thread itself was already political.
Aren't politics already banned/discouraged?
Doesn't stop some people.
Such as a comment about building a wall that used to be reply #8 in this thread.
I hate when politics get into unrelated topics.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 28, 2019, 09:45:31 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 28, 2019, 09:32:31 AM
Quote from: US71 on January 28, 2019, 08:42:51 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 28, 2019, 08:16:52 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 27, 2019, 10:36:53 PM
I think the solution is to topic ban him from inserting politics into threads. The restriction does not apply if previous posts or the thread itself was already political.
Aren't politics already banned/discouraged?
Doesn't stop some people.
Such as a comment about building a wall that used to be reply #8 in this thread.
I hate when politics get into unrelated topics.
Politics is, sadly, a given sometimes. It's when it's irrelevant or incendiary that causes problems.
"Irrelevant or incendiary" describes what reply #8 was intended to be. No prizes for guessing the origin.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 28, 2019, 10:07:12 AM
"Irrelevant or incendiary" describes what reply #8 was intended to be. No prizes for guessing the origin.
"Irrelevant or incendiary" also isn't exclusive to a particular boarder. We have more than one individual who can't seem to discuss what they had for breakfast without mentioning which politician(s) they hate.
I believe there's at least one person for whom the thread locking is the objective.
Quote from: vdeane on January 28, 2019, 12:52:27 PM
I believe there's at least one person for whom the thread locking is the objective.
Possibly. I believe there's at least one person who steers threads towards controversial topics deliberately.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 28, 2019, 08:27:32 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 27, 2019, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 27, 2019, 06:47:34 PM
I can't recall ever seeing a post that wasn't at least partly in response to something prior to it.
I've seen it a few times.
My fondest example of this has nothing to do with this forum. My parents and extended family were eating dinner at a restaurant. A few of us were talking about something (Let's say, sports). My mom, always trying to insert herself into every conversation, suddenly blurts out "My favorite channel is the Weather Channel!" We laughed hysterically, not only because she admits that without a second though, but our conversation had absolutely nothing to do with weather or tv!
The funny thing is, if something like that happened on the forum, I don't even think I'd be angry. I would find it more funny than anything. and I say that because I'm not sure how I'd react, because I've never seen anything like that. Apparently others have?
Quote from: abefroman329 on January 26, 2019, 08:57:57 PM
Quote from: oscar on January 26, 2019, 08:42:45 PM
What exactly is "thread-jacking"?
In this case, steering the conversation towards controversial topics in a non-controversial thread.
I agree. Thread drift is natural, but going off-topic into a controversial one is what causes problems.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 27, 2019, 01:11:13 AM
I personally think people yelling for threads to be locked are worse than threads going off topic.
If someone wants to contribute to a topic that has been derailed, then just contribute. Often that'll bring the talk back to the subject. People yelling to get a topic locked or stating 'in before locked' aren't doing anything to help.
I agree. The best way to get a thread back on topic is to post something meaningful about the original topic. Once two or three people have done that, the flames usually die down.
This is what I think works well:
Normal thread drift – No moderation needed. The OP and other members tend to gently nudge things back on track if they feel like it, and otherwise it's no big deal.
Thread drift into controversial subject matter – Purple text from a mod. I discourage the deletion of posts, but I do understand it may be warranted (rarely).
Multiple offenses by the same person – PM from a mod reminding the offender of the specific forum guidelines.
Ignoring mod chastisement – Temporary ban.
Quote from: NE2 on January 28, 2019, 02:26:50 PM
I'm trying to poo right now.
That's cool.
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2019, 02:54:45 PM
Quote from: abefroman329 on January 26, 2019, 08:57:57 PM
Quote from: oscar on January 26, 2019, 08:42:45 PM
What exactly is "thread-jacking"?
In this case, steering the conversation towards controversial topics in a non-controversial thread.
I agree. Thread drift is natural, but going off-topic into a controversial one is what causes problems.
I don't mind when it happens; after all, roads take us to other places, and there's all sorts of side subjects around these boards. Some of it is totally natural, and you learn a lot more about individuals from 'natural' thread drift, than you would from whether they like I-238 or not.
Yet, there's a handful of members who damn well know they're steering it into territory that isn't up for discussion, and they do it time and time again. There's going to be some tangential political discussion involving roads and transportation issues, but there's no reason for adults to let it bleed into every discussion. Most of us don't need to know everyone's busy-body opinion on where we need to put our private parts, most of us don't want to constantly hear that the sky is always "falling", how society is going down the crapper, and that you think you're paying for stuff you don't like nor use so that's terrible and stupid.
But...it hasn't really bugged me enough to stop coming here. If it bugs me enough, I'll let them know directly.
Quote from: formulanone on January 28, 2019, 03:13:09 PM
you learn a lot more about individuals from 'natural' thread drift, than you would from whether they like I-238 or not.
I'm not on here to learn about individuals. I'm on here to discuss road-related topics.
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2019, 04:06:55 PM
Quote from: formulanone on January 28, 2019, 03:13:09 PM
you learn a lot more about individuals from 'natural' thread drift, than you would from whether they like I-238 or not.
I'm not on here to learn about individuals. I'm on here to discuss road-related topics.
We could always discuss the Hypoten....... oh never mind. :biggrin:
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2019, 04:06:55 PM
Quote from: formulanone on January 28, 2019, 03:13:09 PM
you learn a lot more about individuals from 'natural' thread drift, than you would from whether they like I-238 or not.
I'm not on here to learn about individuals. I'm on here to discuss road-related topics.
Turns out you can learn a lot about the former from the latter!
I'm serious. If the justification for a certain moderation policy is that we can learn about each other, then it's not a good justification. This is a topic-based forum, not just a free-for-all chatroom like IRC.
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2019, 05:12:08 PM
I'm serious. If the justification for a certain moderation policy is that we can learn about each other, then it's not a good justification. This is a topic-based forum, not just a free-for-all chatroom like IRC.
Well this is a forum, not a super serious road scholar convention.
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2019, 05:12:08 PM
I'm serious. If the justification for a certain moderation policy is that we can learn about each other, then it's not a good justification. This is a topic-based forum, not just a free-for-all chatroom like IRC.
As far as I can tell, no one with any authority is taking my suggestion seriously, so there's no need to approach it from that standpoint.
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2019, 04:06:55 PM
Quote from: formulanone on January 28, 2019, 03:13:09 PM
you learn a lot more about individuals from 'natural' thread drift, than you would from whether they like I-238 or not.
I'm not on here to learn about individuals. I'm on here to discuss road-related topics.
I see the forum experience on here as a hybrid of the two. The board is centered around road-related topics, and that is the bulk of what is being discussed, but as we talk about it, communicate, and interact as a community, we naturally learn more about each other along the way, as a result. While roads are the common ground and the base of most discussions, we all learn about our individual selves to some extent, and we all contribute uniquely to the roadgeek community. I don't see discussing road-related topics and learning more about ourselves over-time as always being mutually exclusive.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 28, 2019, 05:22:42 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2019, 05:12:08 PM
I'm serious. If the justification for a certain moderation policy is that we can learn about each other, then it's not a good justification. This is a topic-based forum, not just a free-for-all chatroom like IRC.
Well this is a forum, not a super serious road scholar convention.
You mean we're not professional viatologists!? :-o
Quote from: vdeane on January 28, 2019, 09:08:23 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 28, 2019, 05:22:42 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2019, 05:12:08 PM
I'm serious. If the justification for a certain moderation policy is that we can learn about each other, then it's not a good justification. This is a topic-based forum, not just a free-for-all chatroom like IRC.
Well this is a forum, not a super serious road scholar convention.
You mean we're not professional viatologists!? :-o
I prefer Road Scholar :)
Quote from: vdeane on January 28, 2019, 09:08:23 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 28, 2019, 05:22:42 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2019, 05:12:08 PM
I'm serious. If the justification for a certain moderation policy is that we can learn about each other, then it's not a good justification. This is a topic-based forum, not just a free-for-all chatroom like IRC.
Well this is a forum, not a super serious road scholar convention.
You mean we're not professional viatologists!? :-o
That phrase is so famous that it got into the urban dictionary. It apparently means things that are wrong. Are we wrong? Or is Calrog just that dumb?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 28, 2019, 09:31:27 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 28, 2019, 09:08:23 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 28, 2019, 05:22:42 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2019, 05:12:08 PM
I'm serious. If the justification for a certain moderation policy is that we can learn about each other, then it's not a good justification. This is a topic-based forum, not just a free-for-all chatroom like IRC.
Well this is a forum, not a super serious road scholar convention.
You mean we're not professional viatologists!? :-o
That phrase is so famous that it got into the urban dictionary. It apparently means things that are wrong. Are we wrong? Or is Calrog just that dumb?
Someone took his phrase and put a spin on it.