What's up with the Lounge Policing lately?
I'm totally on Disch's side here. If you want a thread to die, why do you participate in it? Don't like a thread? Ignore it and move on.
closed account (z05DSL3A)
| I agree with Disch. It's the lounge, nothing wrong with topics going off on tangents. |
I also believe that the OP of a thread should be the one who keeps the thread on track (unless there is a blatant attempt to derail it).
| Canis lupus wrote: |
|---|
| I also believe that the OP of a thread should be the one who keeps the thread on track (unless there is a blatant attempt to derail it). |
I've seen tons of threads where the OP try to get it back on topic and no one pays attention to them. For example, the thread on adoption, the OP said on page 25 to get it back on topic1, but was ignored.
| Fredbill wrote: |
|---|
| I do not know how this promotes your point. |
Think about it for a bit because that means you obviously don't get the point of my post.
@Disch
If in all the other forums you are expected to stay on topic and not take tangents. The Lounge is a catch-all for topics that don't go into the other forums, but that doesn't mean the staying on topic goes out the window too in the Lounge. If staying on topic doesn't matter in the Lounge, then why bother making a topic for it or multiple threads? Just make one large thread that others can post to or say what they want where the topic is whatever you feel like saying at the time if topics aren't to be stuck to like the other forums.
1. http://www.cplusplus.com/forum/lounge/126687/25/#msg689877
closed account (z05DSL3A)
| I've seen tons of threads where the OP try to get it back on topic and no one pays attention to them. For example, the thread on adoption, the OP said on page 25 to get it back on topic1, but was ignored. |
I consider Lounge as a "hydepark" section - you can talk about everything. There's no offtopic in Lounge, because Lounge itself is offtopic. The purpose is not sticking to the topic, but talking and exchanging opinions. Personally I have a rule "There's no offtopic in offtopic section".
I can understand people complaining about thread changing subject from one to another - but most of the times topics are connected, and anyway, it got changed for a reason - people want to talk about it, and it feels natural that they continue their discussion in the thread that started the discussion.
As for OP, he's just participating in conversation. If you've ever been to 4chan or similar board, you'll notice that (apart from much lower language standards), most of the threads stick to the topic, but some slide off. No one cares - it's just how the things are. OP can't do anything about it - he has no power. And it's good this way, imho.
And list of banned topics is just plain stupid.
I can understand people complaining about thread changing subject from one to another - but most of the times topics are connected, and anyway, it got changed for a reason - people want to talk about it, and it feels natural that they continue their discussion in the thread that started the discussion.
As for OP, he's just participating in conversation. If you've ever been to 4chan or similar board, you'll notice that (apart from much lower language standards), most of the threads stick to the topic, but some slide off. No one cares - it's just how the things are. OP can't do anything about it - he has no power. And it's good this way, imho.
And list of banned topics is just plain stupid.
I have to agree with taxonomic-classification Grey Wolf here, the OP wasn't making an attempt to get back on topic there, he was asking other people to do it for him.
I don't know if I like the idea of the OP "owning" a thread; IMHO proprietorship really belongs to those who vest the most interest in it. By default this would normally be the OP but if they left a thread that is then kept alive by other contributors then how can they then have any say in where it goes? I suppose it's kind of like Adverse Possession, there are two valid sides of the arguments neither of which is really fair to both parties at the same time.
Anyone who didn't see where that thread was headed hasn't been on the internet long enough. I bailed on it kind of early but I have to ask, have we observed Godwins law in there yet?
EDIT:
MatthewRock said:
I would hate to see what this board would do with our own version of the Airplane on a tread mill. I'm not saying you're wrong, I've just seen how heated some contributors here can get.
I don't know if I like the idea of the OP "owning" a thread; IMHO proprietorship really belongs to those who vest the most interest in it. By default this would normally be the OP but if they left a thread that is then kept alive by other contributors then how can they then have any say in where it goes? I suppose it's kind of like Adverse Possession, there are two valid sides of the arguments neither of which is really fair to both parties at the same time.
Anyone who didn't see where that thread was headed hasn't been on the internet long enough. I bailed on it kind of early but I have to ask, have we observed Godwins law in there yet?
EDIT:
MatthewRock said:
| And list of banned topics is just plain stupid. |
I would hate to see what this board would do with our own version of the Airplane on a tread mill. I'm not saying you're wrong, I've just seen how heated some contributors here can get.
Last edited on
| have we observed Godwins law in there yet? |
I always observe this law. Hitler is my favourite evil character. Perhaps Britain's most fierce, evil and hated enemy and fairly recent too.
Edit: Yes we did.
Last edited on
@Computergeek01 - I know that some topics are really mostly generating negative emotions - talking about religion and differences between beliefs are causing shitstorm. But we're (at least partly) grown ups; we should know when to talk, and when to not. You can't really teach people respect by C++ forum; if they lack it now, it's probably too late. Remember, that you're talking with someone who's probably far away, so his opinion doesn't really matter for you You're free to ignore what he's saying, and just don't reply in topic. And if his behavior abusive, you can always report him - that happened some time ago to vlad from moscow, but that's another story.
Vlad was\is a textbook narcissist; his entire self worth was built around his knowledge of C\C++ and so he couldn't take anyone else contributing to the same threads as him because he saw everything that diverged from his train of thought as a criticism. We didn't report him just because we disagreed with his opinion or because he got a little heated in some discussions, we did so because his kind of behavior is not welcome here. IMHO he was on the extreme end of the exceptions to most users here.
A banned list would be a card that is held in reserve. We're not anywhere near that point here so it seems extreme. But it is a valid tool that shouldn't be dismissed as an option tomorrow just because it isn't needed today.
A banned list would be a card that is held in reserve. We're not anywhere near that point here so it seems extreme. But it is a valid tool that shouldn't be dismissed as an option tomorrow just because it isn't needed today.
closed account (9E360pDG)
Temp. account.
I agree with Disch. I haven't recieved any pop ups in "my topics" (in the real account) so i don't see how that thread is not ignorable.
I know the thread shouldn't have been taken over like that but the OP didn't participate (something i've noticed on other forums).
I also agree that threads could change topics but that's because of it's natural transition.
I agree with Disch. I haven't recieved any pop ups in "my topics" (in the real account) so i don't see how that thread is not ignorable.
I know the thread shouldn't have been taken over like that but the OP didn't participate (something i've noticed on other forums).
I also agree that threads could change topics but that's because of it's natural transition.
I know why people are complaining, it's that little blue bubble that says "new" on it. You look for it when you click on your 'My Topics' section and then get excited when it's there thinking that someone might be asking you for more help, after all that good feeling is why most of us are here. But then you see it's attached to that one thread you commented on but the conversation is now on something you have no interest in. It's kind of a let down and it's a really good argument for an 'unsubscribe' button. As for me, I've gotten used to it but then again I've been here longer then most.
Last edited on
@Computergeek01
I wonder if vlad just wasn't another spoonlicker persona as he came back and then suddenly changed his name to Vlad Licker.
Though, this is yet another pointless debate as can be viewed by Fredbill's previous account. We all know that if Twicker doesn't agree with a report, he won't acknowledge the report and he won't ban an account. Fred was reported for thread derailment in the Lounge only, as far as I can remember, and got banned for it. This would seem to imply that Twicker does feel that topics even in the Lounge should be on topic rather than shift from one to the next. Of course, since he hasn't closed that topic, maybe he is hoping the debate in that thread will keep those that would derail other posts from doing so or just hasn't had time to lock it.
I wonder if vlad just wasn't another spoonlicker persona as he came back and then suddenly changed his name to Vlad Licker.
Though, this is yet another pointless debate as can be viewed by Fredbill's previous account. We all know that if Twicker doesn't agree with a report, he won't acknowledge the report and he won't ban an account. Fred was reported for thread derailment in the Lounge only, as far as I can remember, and got banned for it. This would seem to imply that Twicker does feel that topics even in the Lounge should be on topic rather than shift from one to the next. Of course, since he hasn't closed that topic, maybe he is hoping the debate in that thread will keep those that would derail other posts from doing so or just hasn't had time to lock it.
@BHX
I don't know what exactly did Fred do, but I guess there's a difference between changing thread's topic, and topic itself changing its topic(and then, notice that the change itself is more interesting to people, as the first topic had only ~5 pages; rest ~20 are for religion war).
I don't know what exactly did Fred do, but I guess there's a difference between changing thread's topic, and topic itself changing its topic(and then, notice that the change itself is more interesting to people, as the first topic had only ~5 pages; rest ~20 are for religion war).
@MatthewRock
Don't know, just was told it was for repeated reports of thread derailment.
@Canis lupus
It shouldn't matter if the OP comes back every page asking to get back on topic or on page 26 asking to get back on topic, if they ask it should be done and is rude to completely ignore them asking to get back on topic. For all we know the OP could have a busy life, like Twicker, and may not be able to police his own thread (which he shouldn't have to) leading to them coming in a few pages later to ask to go back on topic (granted the OP of that thread said he was watching the debate unfold).
Then why should anyone bother starting a thread if they don't "own" it?
With that logic, I'll go to a week old thread, make my first part on topic, then make a few paragraphs off-topic tangent to have others discuss it, but it will be fine if other members start discussing that new topic. Wait, I've done that a few times on my old BHXSpecter account and was reported for thread derailment and told to make my own thread discussing the topic. Still seems like a double standard to me.
I think allowing a double standard on a site is a poor practice. If you expect a user to stay on topic in the other threads, it should be the same even in the Lounge as I'm sure the OP doesn't appreciate his topic being hijacked from his original question.
Don't know, just was told it was for repeated reports of thread derailment.
@Canis lupus
It shouldn't matter if the OP comes back every page asking to get back on topic or on page 26 asking to get back on topic, if they ask it should be done and is rude to completely ignore them asking to get back on topic. For all we know the OP could have a busy life, like Twicker, and may not be able to police his own thread (which he shouldn't have to) leading to them coming in a few pages later to ask to go back on topic (granted the OP of that thread said he was watching the debate unfold).
| Computergeek01 wrote: |
|---|
| I don't know if I like the idea of the OP "owning" a thread |
Then why should anyone bother starting a thread if they don't "own" it?
| Computergeek01 wrote: |
|---|
| IMHO proprietorship really belongs to those who vest the most interest in it. By default this would normally be the OP but if they left a thread that is then kept alive by other contributors then how can they then have any say in where it goes? |
With that logic, I'll go to a week old thread, make my first part on topic, then make a few paragraphs off-topic tangent to have others discuss it, but it will be fine if other members start discussing that new topic. Wait, I've done that a few times on my old BHXSpecter account and was reported for thread derailment and told to make my own thread discussing the topic. Still seems like a double standard to me.
I think allowing a double standard on a site is a poor practice. If you expect a user to stay on topic in the other threads, it should be the same even in the Lounge as I'm sure the OP doesn't appreciate his topic being hijacked from his original question.
Last edited on
closed account (EwCjE3v7)
I agree, Lounge is for talking about anything you want. That`s what`s it`s for right?
So if you aren`t in a post don`t go "Let this die"
Yes I have done this to, I posted "Is this post still going" and I regret after reading this
So if you aren`t in a post don`t go "Let this die"
Yes I have done this to, I posted "Is this post still going" and I regret after reading this
| BHX wrote: |
|---|
| With that logic, I'll go to a week old thread, make my first part on topic, then make a few paragraphs off-topic tangent to have others discuss it, but it will be fine if other members start discussing that new topic. |
Nevermind that this scenario is extremely unlikely... let's go with it and say someone does it.
Great. What's the problem? A week old thread nobody is interested any more. So I post in it to respark the conversation with a related point. How is that a bad thing? How is it any worse than starting a new thread that links to the old one for context?
| I think allowing a double standard on a site is a poor practice. If you expect a user to stay on topic in the other threads, it should be the same even in the Lounge |
That logic doesn't make sense. Different boards have different rules. If we treat all boards the same then there's no point in having more than 1 board.
closed account (9E360pDG)
We would just have one mega super duper massively massive forum with at least 1 billion users, with at least 30 billion posts, with at least 500,000 million users trying to post at the same time and it will be super slow and run on a super computer that overheats frequently leaving the forum inaccessible for at least 2 weeks.
You see why i had problems when he kept indirectly comparing gd.net to cplusplus.com using my posts.
You see why i had problems when he kept indirectly comparing gd.net to cplusplus.com using my posts.
Last edited on
| We would just have one mega super duper massively massive forum with at least 1 billion users, with at least 30 billion posts, with at least 500,000 million users trying to post at the same time and it will be super slow and run on a super computer that overheats frequently leaving the forum inaccessible for at least 2 weeks. You see why i had problems when he kept indirectly comparing gd.net to cplusplus.com using my posts. |
Nathan, what does that have to do with anything related to this topic?
I missed Nathan's point, but I'm with Disch in this one; different boards = different rules. We need to be nice to beginners, since they're just learning; also there shouldn't be offtopic, but because of nature of board, it's unlikely.
But as in beginners section - it may happen that someone asks how to create a function that accepts array of arrays of some custom class, which ends up in explaining STL's usability, some STL containers, and OOP in practice, or discussing this thing. Theoretically it's off-topic(he could've just said how to do it), but it's just natural that if you talk about one topic, few others are worth talking about. Of course, it's beginners board and a different situation, but forum is for people - if they want to talk about off topic that was born while talking on-topic, I don't mind.
But as in beginners section - it may happen that someone asks how to create a function that accepts array of arrays of some custom class, which ends up in explaining STL's usability, some STL containers, and OOP in practice, or discussing this thing. Theoretically it's off-topic(he could've just said how to do it), but it's just natural that if you talk about one topic, few others are worth talking about. Of course, it's beginners board and a different situation, but forum is for people - if they want to talk about off topic that was born while talking on-topic, I don't mind.
Last edited on
closed account (9E360pDG)
Sorry. I was just trying to show Disch's last statement on treating all forums the same. I believe i've expressed that ok and need no further expansion.
Sorry.
Sorry.