Discussion on thread drift and splitting

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Jun 21, 2010 2:13 pm

Bill, I hope you don't me using this post to continue, as I think its best for me to walk my talk by not allowing myself to take the original thread any further adrift. Your post was a good one, and so I did it this way.

Bill Sikes;1317619 wrote:

I do not think that there should be censure for posting frivolous comments in a thread, however I do not think that frivolous comments should be frequently interjected.

I do not see anything particularly wrong with normal "thread drift".I agree, both should be expected to a small degree. However, splitting a thread that has gone off course such as, say, your Sparkle thread, could and should be split so that anyone attempting to read it could maintain a sense of continuity in the conversation. As it is there are actually 3 or perhaps even 4 different conversations in that thread. The members who have taken it adrift are descent people and most likely just got lost in the thread, but it would be difficult to pull that one back at this point. What happens is either one of the conversations must temporarily cease for the other to continue. Why not just dedicate one thread to each conversation? Thats sensible in my view, and is anything but censoring, in fact, taking a thread that far off course is in itself censorship. Everyone wins when a forum is kept tidy.

Before I get jumped on for beating a dead horse or wanting the last word - its a discussion forum.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Mon Jun 21, 2010 2:17 pm

Ahso!;1317744 wrote: Bill, I hope you don't me using this post to continue

Hell's bells, if I may say that.... I psoted a reply, which now looks completely out of context, to your original post, mentioning the possibility of "thoughtful psoters", just a minute ago!

How did this "switch" happen?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Jun 21, 2010 2:31 pm

Bill Sikes;1317755 wrote: Yes, I know. I have quickly replied in "your" new thread!I'm willing to call it 'ours'.

Royd Fissure · Post by **Royd Fissure** » Mon Jun 21, 2010 2:39 pm

Comes down to experience and self-discipline. I know when I first discovered forums (in about 2004 whereas previously I had found IRC - now want nothing to do with it) I know I committed some terrible faux pas and was sometimes corrected in a kindly manner by those who were much more knowledgeable about the general culture of discussion forms (which is surprisingly generalised at least in English language forums, I haven't got any other language to use to compare cultural understandings).

It took me a while but I worked out that whatever it's called locally (where a discussion thread meanders off from the original theme but unlike an essay doesn't return to it) it's generally frowned upon.

Neophytes, like lion cubs, will get a gentle whack around the ears to make them pay attention; calculated offenders will incur much more than a gentle whack.

But for me now, as a fully legitimised member of the communities of practice called internet forums, a simple reminder and the feeling of the flush of embarrassment is sufficient for me to be careful to ensure I either keep to the general topic of the thread or desperately seek for a hook in my post of wild irrelevancy to at least provide me with a fig leaf of justification for my comments. Oops I think I have portrayed myself as being more cunning than honest :-3 :-2

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:40 pm

Ahso!;1317744 wrote: Before I get jumped on for beating a dead horse or wanting the last word - its a discussion forum.
:wah: I'll claim at least part of that shot. :yh_beatup

I agree it's not censorship to split a thread into its splintered conversations. It strikes me as a major pain in the butt, but I wouldn't be offended. The sparkle thread is, or quickly became, a general vent thread; I'm not sure if any real purpose would be served to split that one up, or others such as the Anything Random thread, but I could understand in threads that were not so casual.

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:13 pm

The Sparkle thread has now been merrily hi-jacked many times, by many posters, for many reasons. The basic matters raised were dealt with, as much as those of us who are well acquainted with Forum Garden, expect them to be dealt with. Which means, nothing much is going to change, but at least a few old friends got to see each other again. And we got some stuff off our stylish chests.

Now it's a general fun thread. There haven't been many of those around in here for a long time. Not everyone wants deadly serious all the time. Especially not in a forum where many of us go to relax. I doubt whether any deadly serious Forum Garden thread - certainly none I've read - ever really got anywhere near resolving any issue. Name me one which has mitigated humanity's woes or expanded the horizons of anyone? Most deadly serious folk have bees in their bonnets and if there is discussion it tends to look like the "dialogue" of an Ionescu play.

I once stumbled on a Forum where members had to be vetted first and only "important" topics could be aired. No small talk or chit chat or any kind. I canned it way before it canned me. Might have the details though somewhere in case anyone's interested ..

Maybe we need a separate area in Forum Garden labelled "Soapbox" where only matters of total gravitas are dealt with? For the deadly serious only! That would no doubt discourage any more frivolous, blonde, inconsequential ForumGardeners from going near. Rather like, I understand, some kinds of blared loud classical music (not vuvuzelas) are used to drive the young or other irresponsibles away from hanging out near shopping malls etc.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Jun 21, 2010 5:04 pm

AussiePam;1317791 wrote: The Sparkle thread has now been merrily hi-jacked many times, by many posters, for many reasons. The basic matters raised were dealt with, as much as those of us who are well acquainted with Forum Garden, expect them to be dealt with. Which means, nothing much is going to change, but at least a few old friends got to see each other again. And we got some stuff off our stylish chests.So they did, and I for one am very happy for all you old friends. I'm just at loss to understand why those fun threads are difficult to start from the beginning. I guess part of the fun is the hijacking itself.

Spot and Snowfire are optimistic concerning change and so I'm supporting their optimism. They're a couple of pretty smart guys and they say TS is reasonable, so I'm biting. Is that okay?

AussiePam;1317791 wrote: Now it's a general fun thread. There haven't been many of those around in here for a long time. Not everyone wants deadly serious all the time. Especially not in a forum where many of us go to relax.I wasn't aware we were talking about 'everyone' and 'all the time'. I've been looking for some flexibility myself. AussiePam;1317791 wrote: I doubt whether any deadly serious Forum Garden thread - certainly none I've read - ever really got anywhere near resolving any issue. Name me one which has mitigated humanity's woes or expanded the horizons of anyone?Well, should we just give up trying to solve issues we can impact then? Humanity is a different story and I wasn't aware we were trying to impact humanity. Do you think FG has that much clout?AussiePam;1317791 wrote: Most deadly serious folk have bees in their bonnets and if there is discussion it tends to look like the "dialogue" of an Ionescu play.Sorry those 'deadly serious' folk disappoint you so, Pam. Its a good thing there are none of them here.

AussiePam;1317791 wrote: I once stumbled on a Forum where members had to be vetted first and only "important" topics could be aired. No small talk or chit chat or any kind. I canned it way before it canned me. Might have the details though somewhere in case anyone's interested ..Why would a person even join such a narrow minded community to begin with?

AussiePam;1317791 wrote: Maybe we need a separate area in Forum Garden labelled "Soapbox" where only matters of total gravitas are dealt with? For the deadly serious only! That would no doubt discourage any more frivolous, blonde, inconsequential ForumGardeners from going near. Rather like, I understand, some kinds of blared loud classical music (not vuvuzelas) are used to drive the young or other irresponsibles away from hanging out near shopping malls etc.We all like a soapbox every now and then, don't we?

theia · Post by **theia** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:14 am

Ahso!;1317744 wrote: Bill, I hope you don't me using this post to continue, as I think its best for me to walk my talk by not allowing myself to take the original thread any further adrift. Your post was a good one, and so I did it this way.

I agree, both should be expected to a small degree. However, splitting a thread that has gone off course such as, say, your Sparkle thread, could and should be split so that anyone attempting to read it could maintain a sense of continuity in the conversation. As it is there are actually 3 or perhaps even 4 different conversations in that thread. The members who have taken it adrift are descent people and most likely just got lost in the thread, but it would be difficult to pull that one back at this point. What happens is either one of the conversations must temporarily cease for the other to continue. Why not just dedicate one thread to each conversation? Thats sensible in my view, and is anything but censoring, in fact, taking a thread that far off course is in itself censorship. Everyone wins when a forum is kept tidy.

Before I get jumped on for beating a dead horse or wanting the last word - its a discussion forum.

For me, the Sparkle thread is a fine example of the wonder of human communication. Communication is vibrant, it moves and changes. For me, the thread feels alive. Tidiness would destroy its energy.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:10 am

theia;1317852 wrote: For me, the Sparkle thread is a fine example of the wonder of human communication. Communication is vibrant, it moves and changes. For me, the thread feels alive. Tidiness would destroy its energy.So, if it feels good, do it?

I'm not against having a playground and behaving a bit badly. I just think there can be accommodations for all. We'll see what happens, if anything, now that we know TS has taken a look at the different points of view.

theia · Post by **theia** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:39 am

Ahso!;1317894 wrote: So, if it feels good, do it?

I'm not against having a playground and behaving a bit badly. I just think there can be accommodations for all. We'll see what happens, if anything, now that we know TS has taken a look at the different points of view.

Where did I say that?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:04 am

theia;1317917 wrote: Where did I say that?
I remember one time, but you've sworn me to secrecy. :sneaky:

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:07 am

theia;1317917 wrote: Where did I say that?I interpreted your post as filled with connotative words such as 'wonder', 'vibrant' and 'feels alive' to imply emotional satisfaction. Theres nothing wrong with that, I wasn't insulting you.

Your conversation would not suffer at all if it had a different title. Thats all thread splitting does. We're not talking about trashing any posts, just separating the different conversations.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:16 am

Ahso!;1317928 wrote: I interpreted your post as filled with connotative words such as 'wonder', 'vibrant' and 'feels alive' to imply emotional satisfaction. Theres nothing wrong with that, I wasn't insulting you.

Your conversation would not suffer at all if it had a different title. Thats all thread splitting does. We're not talking about trashing any posts, just separating the different conversations.

You do that a lot, ya know? Rather then quote someone and argue the quote, you 'interpret/slant' and then make your point against your own statement rather then theirs. Kind of hard to lose a debate with yourself, that way. Would certainly be a lot harder to argue off what she actually says.

Very interesting to watch.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:31 am

flopstock;1317929 wrote: You do that a lot, ya know? Rather then quote someone and argue the quote, you 'interpret/slant' and then make your point against your own statement rather then theirs. Kind of hard to lose a debate with yourself, that way. Would certainly be a lot harder to argue off what she actually says.

Very interesting to watch.I appreciate that, thanks. I'm not sure I've ever been told it before. How do you not do that? How do you not interpret meaning or implication to words?

I'm carrying that last part over to another thread. I'd appreciate advice on how to communicate better.

Okay, lets try it this way then:

theia;1317852 wrote: For me, the Sparkle thread is a fine example of the wonder of human communication. Communication is vibrant, it moves and changes. For me, the thread feels alive. Tidiness would destroy its energy.
I can make the same statement regarding the original purpose of the thread.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:36 am

Back on point, kinda...

Let's say oaf and bowser get into a sideshow in a thread -

Did you know - They both have the ability to change their post content or even to delete the posts entirely - for up to 24 hours.

You should PM them and ask them politely to consider moving it elsewhere, if you find them disruptive to the thread. Their reaction should tell you something about them and whether you need to ignore them in the future. If enough of us choose to ignore them, they will find somewhere else to be the center of attention.

I routinely cruise around folks. I'm equally certain folks cruise around me. It works.

please note - not cruising around you :p:D

theia · Post by **theia** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:39 am

Accountable;1317926 wrote: I remember one time, but you've sworn me to secrecy. :sneaky:

And, being a man of your word, I know you'll keep it that way

Ahso, I didn't take what you said as an insult, I was curious as to why you interpreted my post that way.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 9:01 am

flopstock;1317935 wrote: Back on point, kinda...

Let's say oaf and bowser get into a sideshow in a thread -

Did you know - They both have the ability to change their post content or even to delete the posts entirely - for up to 24 hours.

You should PM them and ask them politely to consider moving it elsewhere, if you find them disruptive to the thread. Their reaction should tell you something about them and whether you need to ignore them in the future. If enough of us choose to ignore them, they will find somewhere else to be the center of attention.

I routinely cruise around folks. I'm equally certain folks cruise around me. It works.

please note - not cruising around you :p:DSometimes, if a thread is left for a few hours, its been taken off topic for a long period of time with many posts, thats where moderation comes in, IMO.

I have tried your suggestion in the past with poor results but perhaps for one or two posts it could work.

The other issue is spamming a thread with copy and paste material.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 9:41 am

flopstock;1317935 wrote: Back on point, kinda...

Let's say oaf and bowser get into a sideshow in a thread -

Did you know - They both have the ability to change their post content or even to delete the posts entirely - for up to 24 hours.

You should PM them and ask them politely to consider moving it elsewhere, if you find them disruptive to the thread. Their reaction should tell you something about them and whether you need to ignore them in the future. If enough of us choose to ignore them, they will find somewhere else to be the center of attention.

I routinely cruise around folks. I'm equally certain folks cruise around me. It works.

please note - not cruising around you :p:D

Nice try, we all know who you are speaking of. Which one is Nomad?

Ahso!;1317945 wrote: Sometimes, if a thread is left for a few hours, its been taken off topic for a long period of time with many posts, thats where moderation comes in, IMO.

I have tried your suggestion in the past with poor results but perhaps for one or two posts it could work.

The other issue is spamming a thread with copy and paste material.

Ahso, even if a thread of yours drifts while your gone, all you have to do is begin the next post with:

To get back on topic:

Then proceed.

Instead of getting aggravated about it just redirect it.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 9:52 am

YZGI;1317953 wrote:

Ahso, even if a thread of yours drifts while your gone, all you have to do is begin the next post with:

To get back on topic:

Then proceed.

Instead of getting aggravated about it just redirect it.I know to do that, but the question is: how many people have come across the thread and decided not to post because it seemed no longer worth while seeing its been taken so far off topic for so long. If a person begins reading a thread due to its titled subject and finds themselves suddenly reading, say, a personal argument from personal attacks such as Spot had to endure in the sparkle thread for a period of time, they may very well become disinterested, after all, its not what the thread was about and why they began reading it. Theres no telling how many times that happens in totality, but I can tell you that it has prevented me from participating in many threads since I've been involved in forums.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:43 am

Ya know, one thing that happens when the practice of thread hijacking is commonplace is that those threads appear to become exclusive conversations.

People lurking may come to believe the forum itself is exclusive.

I think its important that when inviting new membership or even old members to return to get the house in order.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 11:56 am

Ahso!;1317957 wrote: one thing that happens when the practice of thread hijacking is commonplace is that those threads appear to become an exclusive conversations.

People lurking may come to believe the forum itself is exclusive.

Yet when few people post, the forum stagnates, and becomes really *quite* exclusive.

Ahso!;1317957 wrote: I think its important that when inviting new membership or even old members to return to get the house in order.

I would substitute "to get it *back* in order", or back in disorder, if you like. If it is too ordered - and in its' heyday it was not very ordered at all - it becomes very dull and boring, and haemorrhages users into the ether. A good shovel of entropy is very neccesary.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:05 pm

Bill Sikes;1317972 wrote: Yet when few people post, the forum stagnates, and becomes really *quite* exclusive.

I would substitute "to get it *back* in order", or back in disorder, if you like. If it is too ordered - and in its' heyday it was not very ordered at all - it becomes very dull and boring, and haemorrhages users into the ether. A good shovel of entropy is very neccesary.
I have plenty of that for you...

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:32 pm

I think a fair compromise would be just one or perhaps two moderated forums to accommodate those who would like to use it.

I'd volunteer to moderate it (that forum only) along with a couple of other volunteers.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:56 pm

Ahso!;1317987 wrote: I think a fair compromise would be just one or perhaps two moderated forums to accommodate those who would like to use it.

I'd volunteer to moderate it (that forum only) along with a couple of other volunteers.

There is a debate forum. I remember volunteering to try to participate if you guys threw something out there...:guitarist

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:04 pm

flopstock;1317993 wrote: There is a debate forum. I remember volunteering to try to participate if you guys threw something out there...:guitaristI asked Spot about using that one and he said its for formal debate only.

theia · Post by **theia** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:12 pm

Ahso, just a thought...when you next post a new thread on a particular topic that you want to discuss, why not preface it with a request that contributors stay on topic? I think most of us here appreciate how you feel about thread drift and would respect your request.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:14 pm

Ahso!;1317994 wrote: I asked Spot about using that one and he said its for formal debate only.
Thats why I don't go in there. I hate wearing ties and I never go formal.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:18 pm

theia;1317995 wrote: Ahso, just a thought...when you next post a new thread on a particular topic that you want to discuss, why not preface it with a request that contributors stay on topic? I think most of us here appreciate how you feel about thread drift and would respect your request.I will do that, thanks for the suggestion. The only problem is that if there are those that don't respect the request and there is no recourse to enforce it, the person or people will get the message that its a sure way to push my buttons. There are four people in this forum who have done so in the past.

I'm content to not start threads here if that is what need be.

theia · Post by **theia** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:28 pm

Ahso!;1317997 wrote: I will do that, thanks for the suggestion. The only problem is that if there are those that don't respect the request and there is no recourse to enforce it, the person or people will get the message that its a sure way to push my buttons. There are four people in this forum who have done so in the past.

I'm content to not start threads here if that is what need be.

If someone blatantly ignores your request, they will appear exceptionally disrespectful and foolish. Maybe they won't want to risk that.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:35 pm

theia;1317999 wrote: If someone blatantly ignores your request, they will appear exceptionally disrespectful and foolish. Maybe they won't want to risk that.Unfortunately two of the four are always exceptionally disrespectful and foolish and the other two are just disrespectful. But perhaps I'll give it a try. Though I'm hopeful TS will be bold enough to give my suggestion a go.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 2:54 pm

Ahso!;1317994 wrote: I asked Spot about using that one and he said its for formal debate only.

How much "traffic" does it get? I'm not sure I can get there.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:00 pm

Ahso!;1317987 wrote: I think a fair compromise would be just one or perhaps two moderated forums to accommodate those who would like to use it.

I'd volunteer to moderate it (that forum only) along with a couple of other volunteers.Go for it. Send Tombstone a message. That's likely all it will take to make it happen.

I gotta say, when you artificially neaten things up to attract new posters, you get new posters that prefer the artificially neatened up forum and not what the rest of us call home.

Bill Sikes;1318045 wrote: How much "traffic" does it get? I'm not sure I can get there.You can count the footprints. :-3

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:14 pm

Accountable;1318047 wrote: Go for it. Send Tombstone a message. That's likely all it will take to make it happen.

I gotta say, when you artificially neaten things up to attract new posters, you get new posters that prefer the artificially neatened up forum and not what the rest of us call home.

You can count the footprints. :-3Already done more than once over than a month ago. Not even a reply, yet.

Theres nothing artificial to respecting conversations. Most long term successful forums do thread splitting and advise members when they're getting out of hand instead of remaining silent and waiting for the problems to get to the point of warning and issuing infractions.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:22 pm

Ahso!;1318053 wrote: Most long term successful forums do thread splitting and advise members when they're getting out of hand instead of remaining silent and waiting for the problems to get to the point of warning and issuing infractions.

Apart from the obvious comment, most gardeners find that their beds bloom far more beautifully and/or become more fruitful by the application of fertilisers - possibly "organic" - and a dressing of lime from time to time, and that the general application of sodium chlorate is eventually counter-productive.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:36 pm

Bill Sikes;1318056 wrote: Apart from the obvious comment, most gardeners find that their beds bloom far more beautifully and/or become more fruitful by the application of fertilisers - possibly "organic" - and a dressing of lime from time to time, and that the general application of sodium chlorate is eventually counter-productive.Now I'm confused. I thought all this talk for the past couple of weeks has been addressing the fact that there aren't many gardeners left and the idea is to figure out ways to get some old ones back along with some new ones. I think someone put it in terms of 'stopping the bleeding', no?

So far, as I see it, one has returned after about a year, one other has returned after about a 2 month absence, two others have stopped in to say hello, and one came by to get some old baggage off her chest. Are these the final results sought?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:41 pm

Ahso!;1318053 wrote: Already done more than once over than a month ago. Not even a reply, yet.

Theres nothing artificial to respecting conversations. Most long term successful forums do thread splitting and advise members when they're getting out of hand instead of remaining silent and waiting for the problems to get to the point of warning and issuing infractions.
Eh.

I prefer freedom and spontaneity. There are plenty of other successful forums to split threads, hairs, and whatever else. Freedom and spontaneity fit me very well for several years here. Lack of order had nothing to do with my self-imposed exile, but too much "order" and fussiness definitely convinced me to steer clear of other forums.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 4:00 am

Ahso!;1318065 wrote: Now I'm confused. I thought all this talk for the past couple of weeks has been addressing the fact that there aren't many gardeners left and the idea is to figure out ways to get some old ones back along with some new ones. I think someone put it in terms of 'stopping the bleeding', no?

Yes, quite - however, the point is that the current rules and strictures seem to have had a counter-productive effect, so "policy" could do with a re-think regarding relaxing or removing regulation - and new rules and strictures are liable to worsten the situation.

Ahso!;1318065 wrote: So far, as I see it, one has returned after about a year, one other has returned after about a 2 month absence, two others have stopped in to say hello, and one came by to get some old baggage off her chest. Are these the final results sought?

I hope not, it's painfully s-l-o-w in the Garden now. The posting rate is negligable.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:57 am

Accountable;1318066 wrote:

I prefer freedom and spontaneity. There are plenty of other successful forums to split threads, hairs, and whatever else. Freedom and spontaneity fit me very well for several years here. Lack of order had nothing to do with my self-imposed exile, but too much "order" and fussiness definitely convinced me to steer clear of other forums.If you could, would you implement this philosophy into our educational system? Or do you prefer structure in a school setting?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:01 am

Bill Sikes;1318137 wrote: Yes, quite - however, the point is that the current rules and strictures seem to have had a counter-productive effect, so "policy" could do with a re-think regarding relaxing or removing regulation - and new rules and strictures are liable to worsten the situation.Some have argued its the implementation of those rules.

Lets say you are entertaining friends/family on the back deck during a merry pleasant day and the children are playing loudly and interrupting conversation where the adults are gathered obviously annoying some of the guests. What if anything would you do?

You folks do entertain over there? *kidding*

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:06 am

Ahso!;1318206 wrote: Some have argued its the implementation of those rules.

Lets say you are entertaining friends/family on the back deck during a merry pleasant day and the children are playing loudly and interrupting conversation where the adults are gathered obviously annoying some of the guests. What if anything would you do?
I'd spray em with water and have a good laugh. I would expect my friends to do the same.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:21 am

YZGI;1318209 wrote: I'd spray em with water and have a good laugh. I would expect my friends to do the same.Thats why I didn't direct the question your way. I'm glad that works for you though.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:27 am

Ahso!;1318219 wrote: Thats why I didn't direct the question your way. I'm glad that works for you though.

I thought it would be to your benefit to here my answer. Oh wait...

:)

I doubled your smilies.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:29 am

Ahso!;1318206 wrote: Some have argued its the implementation of those rules.

If there're going to be more rules, then I'll be off to pastures new. I'm not trying to be nasty, that's just a fact. It's touch and go at the moment, although I am currently trying to post more.

Ahso!;1318206 wrote: Lets say you are entertaining friends/family on the back deck during a merry pleasant day and the children are playing loudly and interrupting conversation where the adults are gathered obviously annoying some of the guests.

I'd give them some advice, which being generally well behaved children *and* adults, they'd probably take.

However, to continue your simile, if it was a gathering where people were only permitted to talk of ceretain things, and if once started they digressed, or were too loud, or were disrespectful to anyone, then they'd get a jack-boot up their crevice, I don't think I'd bother to have the gathering. Were I invited to such, I'd decline.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:35 am

YZGI;1318224 wrote: I thought it would be to your benefit to here my answer. Oh wait...

:)

I doubled your smilies.It is! But my follow up question is: how long would you do that for? Does there come a time when what you guys want to talk about become important enough to move the distraction elsewhere?

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:38 am

Ahso!;1318219 wrote: Thats why I didn't direct the question your way.

You see, this is symptomatic of the problem. FG is an internet discussion forum, and has, in the past, positively buzzed with enthusiastic participants. An "I didn't ask your opinion" mentality is out of place. It's a free-for-all.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:40 am

Ahso!;1318233 wrote: Does there come a time when what you guys want to talk about become important enough to move the distraction elsewhere?

Probably not except under the most extreme circumstances.

Oh, knickers, you were addressing YZIG, not me. Sorry.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:41 am

Bill Sikes;1318226 wrote: If there're going to be more rules, then I'll be off to pastures new. I'm not trying to be nasty, that's just a fact. It's touch and go at the moment, although I am currently trying to post more.I don't see where anyone has suggested more rules, instead what I've been advocating is less infractions and replaced with more gentle guidance.

Bill Sikes;1318226 wrote: I'd give them some advice, which being generally well behaved children *and* adults, they'd probably take.what would be your advice?

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:43 am

Ahso!;1318233 wrote: It is! But my follow up question is: how long would you do that for? Does there come a time when what you guys want to talk about become important enough to move the distraction elsewhere?
If I need or want to have a serious discussion ( a rarity, which I'm sure doesn't surprise you) I make sure to be in a place or setting that the possibility of interuption is minimal. If interuption still occurs I don't tend to worry about it to much. I adapt and overcome without getting agravated too much.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:43 am

Bill Sikes;1318235 wrote: You see, this is symptomatic of the problem. FG is an internet discussion forum, and has, in the past, positively buzzed with enthusiastic participants. An "I didn't ask your opinion" mentality is out of place. It's a free-for-all.I was joking with that comment. I was acknowledging the wrench he threw in his answer.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:46 am

Ahso!;1318237 wrote: I don't see where anyone has suggested more rules, instead what I've been advocating is less infractions and replaced with more gentle guidance.

what would be your advice?

OK, you win.