The "thread" that evolved into "Emily Test Post" was in the chain games section. That section is all about fun, and what started as Terry doing a test post and ended up being a silly thread cannot be compared to threads in other sections being hijacked and turned into silly drivel. I could see it being wrong in a more serious thread, and I agree that the more serious threads should stay on topic, or as close to on topic as possible. I doubt it would have evolved as it did if it were in another forum.

When you get as many people together in a discussion as we have here, not everyone is going to be knowledgable about every topic they choose to participate in. Sure, some of my thoughts in some threads aren't as brilliant as other peoples, but I choose to participate because I am interested in the topic. I am sure it is the same for alot of people. If each thread was to be limited to only those who have alot of knowledge about the topic, very few people would be involved in most topics. I see these forums as a place where I can be involved in discussions and hopefully learn more about some topics that I may not know alot about when I first join the discussion.

Sure, there are a few people who may spout drivel every time they post, or in most of their posts, but they are few and far between. With as many people participating as we have, I see it as a family reunion type of situation, where everyone should have their say as long as they are trying to be part of the conversation. Not everyone is going to be able to make stellar comments, but most people are going to at least try to be sensible.

Sorry........... what was this thread about again?

wez

I have never gone into Multiplayer or Chain Games, so I haven't seen some of the situations described by Coolupway and Babymoo. I have never seen any undesirable posts in the forums because they are dealt with very quickly by the moderators. The "pre-teens" Cool described never visit us for very long.

So perhaps my perception is different from yours since I don't go into all the threads, but I had never noticed any significant tendency to thread hijacking in the past before this thread started.

Obviously the need or desirability of staying on track will depend on the nature of the forum. Controversial issues and current events should stay on track more than, say, Memories or The Commons.

If a thread starts to go off on a tangent, and it bothers you, why not simply bring it back on track?

Quote:

---

Aggi, who was universally loved in Multi, high-tailed it out of there so quickly no one even knew what happened.. and then a number of others followed.

---

Where oh where has our aggi gone? By the way Hutz you should have seen my girlfriend the other day...she just wouldn't keep her eyes off this other man. Maybe I'm doing something wrong...next time you drop in multi maybe we can chat about it....

I would like to echo Coolupway's sentiments that:

"Call me elitist and even misanthropic if you will, but I think there is a bright line dividing the inane from the meaningful. I think there is also a quite palpable divide between an interesting disquisition on a side issue and a no-segue quantum leap into some totally foreign subject. Not to put too fine a point on it I think people should know enough to refrain from entering a discussion to which they cannot add a meaningful, relevant or at least humorous insight"

I think that in Controversial Issues and Current Events, in particular, it is important for people to try to be meaningful and relevant in their comments and to try to stick to either the main topic or to a related side issue which has been raised in the course of the thread. It may not matter as much in some of the other Forums, but C.I. and C.E. are pretty much devoted to fairly serious issues and concerns. The topics are things that people often feel quite emotional about, or things to which they given a great deal of thought. It's certainly disruptive, and sometimes very upsetting, when a good discussion gets completely thrown off the mark by comments that have nothing to do with the main direction of the thread or that are simply silly.

I think there is a difference between a discussion and a conversation.

C.I. and C.E. are discussion Forums, and both tend to be predominantly serious in nature. Some decorum in those Forums helps in a number of ways. Firstly, by sticking to the topics, it helps to reduce the number of comments of a purely personal nature. That helps to keep people focused on ideas rather than personalities, which does keep friction down. People can argue about ideas and opinions and still remain friends. Once they respond in a personal way, and attack a particular poster rather than what that poster is saying, it can get rather unpleasant. Sticking to the topic reduces the probability of that sort of thing. Secondly, by being a bit more formal in those particular Forums, I think some posters actually do feel freer to express themselves on certain topics because they can maintain a more intellectual detachment from the issue under discussion. So, on balance, I think that sticking to the topic is a good idea in those Forums.
Some of us really enjoy a meaningful discussion or debate and it's very frustrating when a stimulating debate gets hijacked, or worse yet, trashed, by people who have no real interest in the topic.

Certainly the Commons has always been our free-for-all Forum. Pretty much anything does go here and this is definitely the place to have conversations of sorts. Conversations might fit into some of the other Forums as well. But too much "conversation"--i.e. rather unstructured chit chat--will distract from any serious discussion in any Forum, be the discussion about a movie, a book, music, or anything else. I think we have to simply use good judgement. There's space in these Forums to be light and funny and folksy and just get to know each other, but we also have to leave some space to be thoughtful and serious. Sometimes these things don't co-mingle well in the same thread.
People should try to add something meaningful to a thread--any thread. Unlike oral conversation, which can fade as soon as as the moment passes, remarks here are written. They last. Others may be reading these remarks for years.

I'm actually a big fan of Test threads. I think it's fun to goof around. I think it's also great to make small talk. It's great to get to know something about each other and what we like and dislike and what we value. It's great to help each other out whenever we can. There's enough room at FT for all of that--and a great deal more. But there's also a particular place or category for our comments on these boards. We just have to choose the right place--and the right time--before we throw in our two cents.

Quote:

---

Not to put too fine a point on it, I think a very small minority of people on the site post on threads about the subject matter of which they know extremely little.

---

I think it's true that not all of us who might add something to a thread have researched a subject to the ultimate before expressing an opinion. That could apply to me I think. Sometimes I read a thread that has lots of long well written posts in it arguing points very eloquently (respect!).

I pick up the tone of peoples opinions, compare them to what perhaps can be described as a gut feeling I have about a subject, and then summarise my thoughts into a few sentences or paragraphs. Right or wrong, such is my style.

I don't often post in the serious forums (I'm not sure I've even ever started a topic in one) but I'd hate to feel I that I couldn't do so because I haven't read up on a subject to the ultimate degree. If I post, it's usually because I instinctively feel quite strongly that I don't agree with an attitude. It often doesn't take many words to do that. If those few words or paragraphs seem ill informed or wrong I can always be put right can't I?

Re: " ... it's very frustrating when a stimulating debate gets hijacked, or worse yet, trashed, by people who have no real interest in the topic".

I don't see how can anyone "trash" a topic unless the other participants let them. If anyone really tries to sabotage a thread, the moderators will deal with them, won't they?

So why not ignore them and they'll eventually go away.

Or, as I suggested previously, take the initiative to bring the thread back to the original topic.

I echo TW's sentiments. Now, I can read the news myself and I do...I can study and research a question ad nausea, but where else in the world can I ask someone across the world to tell me how they're feeling about some event we see on the news? Nowhere.
If TW's region or my own is having flooding or some other disaster hitting it, I would love to know. If it's a world event, I want to know as well. I'm afraid the more I read about this, the more I still feel the first person approach, when used as a positive tool is a thousand times more effective than the over reliance on massive citations from news sources, that beyond a few links, I'm sure we can all manage for ourselves.

As to the lighter side, I don't see any trouble with that at all.

I still maintain that even in CI, one can still dare say what the feelings are in his or her town about political events, or saying good bye to the troops, or whatever helps understand the other side, and pointing to sources without massive citations is on the contrary the sign of thought.

Massive citations for me, is the equivalent of thread hijacking.

Example, I wanted to know about the fires in Australia they showed on the French news, now where else could I ask our members there if the reports were over exaggerated, or if it was as serious a threat as it looks?
I immediately think, "oh better check with our Aussies, I'll put up a thread in the CE section."
A few links are sufficient then personal comments add to the interest of such a thread.
If someone links to an alternative source then that's fine.
This is my personal opinion though, I can watch the news here in four languages because of my location, but cannot get the balance from people who are there in the country involved from any place but this one.

TW I feel your comment is very valid.

I don't disagree with you, Bruyere. I think threads devoted to personal reactions to events are fine. Those are quite different, however, than threads which are primarily devoted to an intellectual or objective discussion of a topic.
A topic thread asking about personal reactions or feelings to an event could just as easily fit in the Commons as in C.E. Just because it's a topic in the news doesn't mean it has to go in C.E., particularly if it's a personal conversation type of thread.
I think a problem can arise when really serious discussions start getting sidetracked by too many personal asides. These are actually separate ways of responding to topics and sometimes they belong in different threads rather than being thrown into the same thread.
For instance, in C.I. there is a lengthy thread about Iraq which is basically a very serious discussion about the pros and cons and ramifications of invading, or not invading, Iraq. To start talking about something like personal reactions to departing troops in that particular thread, would throw the discussion off kilter and disrupt it somewhat for those who are participating in a more objective analysis. Not that discussing the emotional aspects and the personal changes brought about by an impending war isn't a good idea, it simply belongs in a separate thread, and one that could easily go in the Commons since personal feelings of that sort aren't really controversial social issues. C.I. is primarily for a discussion of issues rather than "conversations" about personal feelings or anecdotal reactions to events or issues.
Both types of threads--the personal and the more intellectual--are valid, but they should probably best be kept separate.

I don't think that anyone has to come armed with massive citations or a full-blown scholarly analysis in order to post in C.I. or C.E. Personally I find posts overweighted with citations sometimes hard to digest.
Most people follow the news reasonably well and think about the topic before posting, and that's all anyone has to do. Hopefully the topics themselves will get people thinking, so that they want to add their say, or just ask questions. I think Coolupway was simply asking that responses at least be related to the topic under discussion rather than unfettered free associations or something really tangential.

But no one who has something thoughtful to say, not scholarly mind you, but merely thoughtful, should be hesitant to post in C.I., even if it's only a few words, as Mr.TW has indicated. And all thoughtful means is that you've stopped to consider the topic for at least a few moments and want to add a relevant (i.e. related) comment. No one has to be super well informed or very well educated to post--just merely thoughtful.

Basically I suspect we all agree on this topic more than we disagree. I think it's just a matter of letting individual threads keep their basic tone and focus. A personal, emotion-oriented or humorous conversational thread doesn't need heavy weight serious irrelevancies thrown into it and a really objective or serious discussion thread really may not benefit from a lot of personal or conversational asides. All kinds of threads have their place here, but it's sometimes better to maintain some separation and put things in their "proper" place. That's one reason there are so many different types of Forums.

The issue of pre-adolescent or adolescent chat room speech or absolutely meaningless drivel turning up in posts is a different matter. That sort of thing irritates many here, no matter where it's posted. Fortunately we really don't get a lot of it and it is discouraged when it does pop up. That sort of stuff can't even pass for conversation.

What is the (essential) link between thread hijacking and first-person pronouning?
Is anything wrong with that pronoun?
Do Descartes (Cogito ergo sum), Luther ( Hier stehe ICH, und kann nicht anders), Montaigne ( Que sais-JE? )qualify as first-person-pronouners?
And why do English first-person pronouners get extra attention by having to use capitals for their I-addiction?

Well, Flem, had Descartes gone on to say that mind-body dualism was very good because the mind and body can both enjoy Cadbury mints, and by the way he was in the store with his Uncle Frank when someone came in who looked just like the old guy on "Diff'rent Strokes,", then I think there might be a problem.

I also think that if Luther, after nailing the 95 theses to the door of the church at Wittenberg, had put the religion aside for a bit, logged in to ft, put up posts on every thread about what he ate that day and what his buddies got him for Xmas, and then turned up in FTA Anon congratulating himself on having reached his 9 trillionth post, some people on the site might feel that the great reformer was succumbing to what Tom Wolfe calls "the cult of ME.". (Yes, I know the "nailing-to-the-door" story is probably apocryphal).

As for Anglophone 1st-person pronouners getting a special buzz from the use of the capital letter, I would just point out that most of them get to do it in only one language! The self-absorbed in Belgium (are there any, by the way?) get to speak about their favorite subject in at least two, and perhaps as many as six!

The problem is mainly French one might say.
Wasn't it Blaise Pascal who started the thread with "Le moi est haissable" " The I is unpopular" (?) and Rimbaud who closed the debate with " Je est un Autre","The I is somebody else" - which some French philosophers beatified as meaning: It's only through the others that you can fully become yourself.
Yet Jean Paul Sartre had his voice in the debate as well, claiming that it was always the Others (L'enfer c'est les autres).
As to self-absorption: what about Louis XIV ( L' état c'est MOI) ; Flaubert ( Madame Bovary c'est MOI).
Doesn't Aldous Huxley favourably compare with them: "I-less in Gaza" ?
May be we can start an I-less thread somewhere among the Chain Games? Anyway by now this thread about thread-hijacking definitely seems to have been hijacked.

I can't help but get the feeling that thins thread has been.....hijacked....

Quote:

---

and then turned up in FTA Anon congratulating himself on having reached his 9 trillionth post,

---

Once again, this is a thread intended for silliness. Several of us had an ongoing joke about how much time we spend here, and our "addiction" to the forums. To keep from "hijacking" other threads with this ongoing joke, the FT Anon thread was born. Sure, we may announce our "milestone" posts in there, but good grief, that is all part of the ongoing joke.

There are many forums and bulletin board sites that are solely for deep, serious discussions. This place is called FUN Trivia, and it is meant for fun. While I enjoy the current events and controversial issues as much as everyone else, I feel there is nothing wrong with being silly in some of the other forums. If someone doesn't agree with the need for the silliness in other forums, he/she can choose to avoid those forums instead of telling those who have fun in them that it is unnecessary.

Don't worry, I'm the culprit...I began the original telltale signs of funtriviaddiction many long days ago...as a means of entertaining us when Quizzyland went down for a time and then, we had many people coming into the forums...
I'd haul it up to the top whenever a technical problem occured, this was of course before the new server...and the posts in there were a lot of fun, as we would extrapolate on what we were all doing, how many fights with our spouses we were having because of the lack of FT, and how world productivity at worksites went up and amazed analysts!
It was embroidered on like a quilt and then put back in the shelf...
Oops, I could always use the third person Bruyere assumes full responsibility for having a bit of fun during technical problems...but I'd sound like Bob Dole.
So when I suggested it be housed downstairs in memories there's never been any problem about having fun in there...
just that the attic was groaning and creaking a bit with it upstairs in the welcome center.
If this keeps up we'll have to start another chapter, funtriviahijackers anon. Be there or be square.

I agree with most of the comments on this thread. However, I think that perhaps it has reached a stage somewhere between a toddler's slanging match "my toy! mine! do it like THIS!" and a New England witch trial "Thou art evil and have perverted this thread beyond the ken of man". The point has been well made but this little community is divided enough at the best of times, to continue this much further can only make things worse.

Moo thinks you are right, TielHard. This could be one issue where we might need to agree to disagree and let it drop. Until recently things seemed to be flowing quite smoothly, and everyone semed able to overlook the few things they might not have agreed on, simply because we all enjoy the site enough to be able to take what we consider the "bumps" along the way.

Moo can't see never talking in first person because Moo thinks it looks silly. How often in life do we really talk in third person?

I don't want it to get to a point where I have to seriously consider each post, how to word it, wonder if one or two people might find it silly or self centered, etc, before I type it in. That is not what this place is about. Ever since this thread has come up, I have been weighing everything I want to say, trying to decide if it is going to be acceptable to the masses, or if I should forget it. I don't want to be in a postion of having to second guess everything I want to add. It is starting to feel like everyone's IQ level, level of seriousness versus being fun loving and light hearted, etc is at stake just to suit a select few who have mentioned all the so called problems with the way people post.

While I agree that we shouldn't run off on huge tangents or completely change the subject of serious threads, I feel it would be hard for most of us to never add a side note that is related to the topic. Some topics are nearly impossible to keep personal feelings out of. I don't think it hurts to add personal feelings within a post as long as they are on topic. Part of every discussion I have ever heard about any major topic was how the people discussing it felt about it.

This is a great place and I would hate to see a division in the ranks over something this avoidable. If there was a post that seems trifling to me, I just move on to the next post and not make an issue of it. It is rare, but I have done it without ever pointing out to the person (or anyone else ) that I thought it was an inferior post. I don't make anyone feel inferior by pointing it out.

I also don't see how mentioning our lives from time to time makes us self centered. I have made several friends along the way, and have learned quite a bit about them from their posts where they mention personal things.

A standing ovation and DEAFENING round of applause for Babymoo!

Now just let me check...I'm in the Commons, right? I can post? *checking over shoulder* I'm finding all this informal regulatory chat a bit taxing, too! I think the "point" has been made............and then some!

If the object was to make one think before posting, it has been well and truly done.

Ahh, how thoughtful and well-reasoned. Quite obviously a complaint about posts with "an orgy of first-person pronouning" (and please double-check the language of the first post on the thread) is the logical equivalent of the argument that the first-person pronoun should not be used at all. Can we really have descended to this level of simplicity?

I think it is wonderful that someone else has taken the time to chide that she "choose(s) to participate because (she is) interested in the topic." How terrible and mean and elitist of the one who started this thread to even suggest that there was even ONE PERSON out there who posted rather heavily and perhaps even randomly on a variety of threads, seemingly just for the sake of posting. We now know that this is never done!

I don't really know where I got such an idea. I mean, it sounds like I was suggesting that someone may have at some point posted something along these lines:

Quote:

---

Tonight... I have hit an all new low. I have posted on everything I can possibly post on... All I wanted to do was hit 1700 posts before I go to bed. I only have about 15 more to hit that goal. That is when you know you truly have a problem! You are so driven to hit a certain number of posts that you will keep searching and refreshing pages that your poor little mouse is begging for a nap

---

Now of course, such a thing was never posted. To be specific, it certainly wasn't posted in the "Major signs of funtriviaddiction" thread on October 21st of last year.
Where I get these ideas I don't know.

And by the way, speaking of the "addiction" thread (and its precursors and/or successors), has anyone taken the time to go back to the very beginning of that thread and reread the first few posts? I would suggest that at the beginning this was not exactly a "silly" thread at all, but instead one that was rather wry and funny. At some point, and again I leave it to those of you with some spare time on this (Yank) holiday to find it, the thing (see the successor thread) turned into a cutesyfest about candy... I think. It is in fact hard to charcterize WHAT it turned into.

This is not a community of second-graders. The demographic skews high because it is by definition a group of people resourceful enough not only to find access to a computer but also to figure out how to communicate on the damned thing. Call me nasty, elitist and mean-spirited -- in essence I already pleaded guilty to those in my blurb, which went up long before I even knew what the fora were. But I believe that there is a point at which "dumbing down" should be identified for what it is, and, to the extent possible, discouraged.

As a mere, trivial "member" of FT, I feel compelled to say that some of the entries of the last few days have been a little much to bear.

Some have a great understanding of history and politics and the humanities and can reflect that in the posts they make.

Some have an understanding of family, community and "the heart" of their daily lives, and they reflect that.

I think there is room enough for all of that here at FT, as long as it is presented in a decent and non-derogatory manner.

Everyman's opinion is important on all issues. Sometimes an insight can be gleaned from the most unexpected source.

The wise take out their pocket watch only when asked what time it is.

Coolup, if you would like to bash me personally, feel free to PM me with it.

All I am trying to say is I don't understand all this boat rocking. There is no need to change everything about this place, and I feel no need to have all the silly things I have said here be brought out for public criticism. Again, the quote you cite is part of the SILLINESS of the FT addiction thread. If you aren't happy with what is said in some of these threads, the simple thing to do would be to avoid them.

Please forgive any repeated sentiments that I give as it is 5:45am, 6 degrees Ferenheit (or however it's spelled) and I'm very cold.

I really think it is just human nature to veer off of the "beaten path" of conversation. It happens in spoken conversation all the time. You may be talking about something as mundane as grocery shopping when something in the conversation reminds you of a song you once heard in 5th grade. You immediately mention this and go off into a memory of how you were doing homework over the phone with a friend when the guy you had a crush on called in on the other line to ask you to the 5th grade dance. You heard the song in question playing from his end of the phone and ever since then, you think of that time every time you hear the song.

Remember in high school how thrilled you were when someone got the teacher off the topic by mentioning something unrelated and suddenly, Geometry became about baseball for half an hour?

We aren't discussing politics here. This is not meant to be a serious thread. From time to time, yes, topics will veer off course but it isn't the end of the world. Sometimes it IS okay to color outside the lines.

And the moral of the story today is: Sometimes it's easier to go with the flow than to ride against the tide.