Driving Threads Off Topic.

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Just what the title and description says: is it ever OK for a thread to be driven off topic?

 

Also: is it OK for a group, with possible moderator collusion and/or participation, to intentionally do so?

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

Yes.

 

Forum police are way more irritating than cache police.

[+Corp Of Discovery]

I guess if I'm going to ask this question I should post the forum guidelines:

 

Groundspeak Forum Guidelines

 

The goal of the Groundspeak Forum is to promote the activity of Geocaching and GPS Usage. It is an open forum sponsored by Groundspeak Inc. for discussing all aspects of Geocaching, Benchmark hunting, GPS Usage and Groundspeak related GPS Gaming.

 

There are certain guidelines you should be aware of before you post messages to this Discussion Forum. It is important there are some basic guidelines of conduct. While most people are courteous and polite; there are some individuals that choose to behave in a disrespectful and irresponsible manner. Unlike other public discussion boards, Groundspeak will take appropriate steps to keep our discussion in line with these guidelines and with good taste.

 

In general we will leave it to you the community, to police yourselves. Treat others with respect. Remember that this is a public venue read by many people spanning all walks of life. If you question a post please use the ‘report this post’ icon in the lower right hand corner.

 

Please understand that we are not attempting to censor any messages or opinions posted, but this is a moderated discussion forum. We simply want to preserve the spirit of an open, interactive discussion without offending participants. This means that we (Groundspeak and the volunteers for Groundspeak) reserve the right to edit/remove inappropriate messages, or to lock a discussion thread. Before taking any of these actions, a moderator will attempt to steer the discussion back to the topic, if this is possible and appropriate. The additional step of editing or deleting a post will only be taken in appropriate circumstances; again, the intent is not to censor legitimate discussion or to change the meaning of any post. If we edit a post and you do not like the changes please feel free to notify us and we will delete your post. Examples of posts that may be edited or deleted include posts containing profanity, chain letter and other spam postings, posts that disclose the tracking number codes for Groundspeak travel bugs or posts that reveal private information about another community member. Other examples are discussed in the guidelines below.

 

Some things to keep in mind when posting:

 

Respect: Respect the guidelines for forum usage, and site usage. Respect Groundspeak, its employees, volunteers, yourself, fellow community members, and guests on these boards. Whether a community member has one post or 5,000 posts, they deserve the same respect.

 

Foul Language and obscene images will not be tolerated. This site is family friendly, and all posts and posters must respect the integrity of the site.

 

Personal Attacks and Flames will not be tolerated. If you want to praise or criticize, give examples as to why it is good or bad, general attacks on a person or idea will not be tolerated.

 

Sock Puppet accounts will not be allowed. A sock puppet is an account made on an internet message board by a person who already has an account for the purpose of posting anonymously. Use your own account for posting personal opinions. Posts from known sock puppet accounts will be deleted and both the puppet and actual account may be banned from using the services of Groundspeak.

 

Keep on topic: Responses to a particular thread should be on-topic and pertain to the discussion. Users should use the New Topic button to start a new discussion which would otherwise be off-topic in the current thread. Threads that are off topic may be closed by the moderator.

 

Private Discussions: Sometimes, a discussion thread strays off into a friendly dialogue or a heated debate among a very small number of users. For these exchanges, use the private discussion feature that is provided through the Groundspeak forums, or the Geocaching.com e-mail system. Public forum posts should be reserved for matters of interest to the general community.

 

Posting Messages: Posting the same message to many topics or boards is considered spam. Duplicate messages will be deleted or consolidated by our moderators. Please do your best to post new topics to the appropriate forum board, moderators will move topics that are posted inappropriately.

 

Commercial Postings/Solicitations are not allowed. Commercial content as a direct or indirect (either intentional or non-intentional) attempt to solicit customers through a forum post will be edited or deleted. Notwithstanding the above, Groundspeak reserves the right to include limited commercial content in this Forum, in its sole discretion.

 

Classifieds advertising is permitted in the ‘GPS Garage Sale’ Forum. (Geocaching.com is not involved in these transactions) Abuse of this forum will be not be tolerated.

 

About our Moderators: Forum Moderators are community volunteers that give up their time to help build a better community. They will assist with focusing topics and enforcing guidelines. They have the ability to edit/delete posts, to move, close or delete topics, and to temporarily moderate users’ posts. Our moderators are equipped with Kevlar flak jackets and an unlimited supply of admin bricks. Do not attempt to engage them in direct combat.

 

Disclaimer: Any messages you post will stay available to the public for as long as this discussion board is online. Please post carefully, once you have posted your message it is here to stay. We will not edit the content you wrote unless it does not conform to these guidelines. If we edit a post and you do not like the changes, we will delete the message at your request.

 

If someone has posted copyrighted material or otherwise illegal material, please notify Groundspeak so that it may be removed.

 

Complaints: If you have an issue with a specific post/topic on this board, please use the ‘report a post’ link in the lower right hand corner of the post. We will review the post and edit/delete if necessary. Any comments on the personnel of Groundspeak or one of the volunteers, please send an e-mail message to contact@Groundspeak.com.

 

Additional Terms: The Groundspeak Forums are further governed by the GEOCACHING.COM SITE TERMS OF USE AGREEMENT, the terms of which are hereby incorporated into these guidelines by reference. The Terms of Use Agreement may be found here: http://www.geocaching.com/about/termsofuse.aspx

 

I've put some relevent sections in bold.

[Clan Riffster]

is it ever OK for a thread to be driven off topic?

Llamas? I see no llamas here. Move along.

[+Quiggle]

As I'm sure many of you are aware, if you see a post of concern to you that violates one or more of the guidelines, please use the REPORT button, which is located below each post. The moderating team will be alerted and can take appropriate action when necessary.

 

 

From the forum guidelines:

Complaints: If you have an issue with a specific post/topic on this board, please use the ‘report a post’ link in the lower right hand corner of the post. We will review the post and edit/delete if necessary. Any comments on the personnel of Groundspeak or one of the volunteers, please send an e-mail message to contact@ Groundspeak.com.

Regarding moderator participation, please keep in mind that the little moderator tag: follows us around to forum sections where we don't moderate. In these cases the posters should be considered regular participants and the report button can/should be used for these posts as well.

 

If there is a post/action by a moderator in the forum section that he/she moderates, feel free to use the second portion of the quoted material above and send a note to the contact@ address.

 

Thanks.

[janx]

I see a lot of threads get pushed off topic with silly posts around here.

 

I also see a lot of threads discouraged, because of pre-existing topic.

 

Like other forums, the style of moderation forms the culture of that forum. Different forums yield different culture.

 

Go see enworld, a D&D gaming forum. The basic rule they have is don't post anything that would offend Eric's Gramma. Stuff gets moved to the right topic forums. flamers get warned, flaming threads get locked. I don't see a lot of off random silliness filling up a thread there, as I do here. Barring 20 threads about the non-existant but expected new edition of D&D, there's no discouragement of topics that have been discussed before, either.

 

Conversely, you can check out the musician site, Harmony-Central's forums for a different style and tone. There, each sub-forum has different rules (or lack of thereof). The moderators (if any) don't do much but get rid of the most beligerant of posters. The rest is handled through peer heckling. Many threads are off-topic, and likely offensive.

[+Criminal]

I like girls, I like them a lot.

[+Semper Questio]

What are these "topics" of which you speak?

[janx]

So, per "Keep on topic: Responses to a particular thread should be on-topic and pertain to the discussion. Users should use the New Topic button to start a new discussion which would otherwise be off-topic in the current thread. Threads that are off topic may be closed by the moderator. "

 

There are 3 posts on this thread that would be off-topic. Shouldn't they get a warning or something...

[Keystone]

What are these "topics" of which you speak?

It would have to be this thread, started by someone who joined the site for the sole purpose of posting in our forums about his extraterrestrial theories. Sorry, but we play our game on Planet Earth! The thread was allowed to remain open for two hours and fifteen minutes after I responded to a "report this post" message. I found the thread so bizarre that I tipped off some folks to go have a look at it. That is the only time I can recall doing that as a moderator. The thread was going to be closed anyhow.

 

The OP of that thread wrote to me and mtn-man. He thanked me for giving him a chance to explain himself, and ranted at mtn-man for closing the thread. He said, among other things, "I guess mtn-man must be your boss." That led to an update to my signature line -- see below.

 

I thought the whole episode was pretty funny, so I thought I'd share it!

[+briansnat]

If a topic naturally drifts to a slightly different subject, I don't see anything wrong with that. Nor do I see a problem with an occasional joke or light hearted comment.

 

If a thread goes off on a totally different tangent, it probably should be split out into its own thread by a moderater.

 

I think the problem occurs when a handful of people use a thread for personal bickering or if someone hijacks it to promote his own agenda.

[ju66l3r]

Topics may drift within their discussion, but the example shown by Keystone is a good example of hijacking via nonsense.

 

Regardless of what people may think of a topic, so long as the moderators haven't closed it for their own reasons, it should stay more or less directly related to the original post. There are plenty of goof-off topics in Off Topic. No need to crap all over someone else's thread with "llamas" and "smurfs" and reply trees to boost up the noise, particularly when you don't think the topic has relevance or meaning...then just stay out of it.

Edited August 7, 2006 by ju66l3r

[+sbell111]

I can think of a few situations where I would have little problem posting off-topic.

• Asked and answered. (What's TNLN?)
  
• Thread merely served as a 'test post'.
  
• Spam threads
  

[+Snoogans]

Nearly every conversation will take a tangent. It's natural. To fight it is just plain anal.

 

The forum police are just as lame as the cache police. Unless a concentrated derailment is going on, it's the OP's job to keep the thread ON topic in my, not so humble, opinion.

[+sbell111]

I also hate cache police.

[+New England n00b]

When there is an obvious trolling, I don't have a problem with derailment, but if something is asked (and is a genuine quetion), and the poster shows some modicum of respect, then I can't say as I support jumping on the original poster.

[+bumblingbs]

I like girls, I like them a lot.

 

What kind of girls do you like, Criminal?

 

Edited to say: I'm sorry, but it is too tempting to not try to hijack a thread about hijacking threads......

Edited August 7, 2006 by bumblingbs

[ju66l3r]

When there is an obvious trolling, I don't have a problem with derailment...

 

And who made you (or I or anyone but the mods) an arbiter of what's to be an "obvious" troll?

 

The "an" post wasn't so obvious a troll. King riched's post isn't an obvious troll.

 

The first "Cheerio" who deems a post unworthy of being left to its own discussion says something assinine about "llamas" or "the pig" or other nonsense and the rest of the General Mills crew just pour out onto the table and take over the topic. The only "derailment" an "obvious" troll needs is to be closed by the moderators. Report it, don't act like it's your own personal playland. If the thread is an issue for the forum, it'll be closed well enough without watching the Bed Spring Brigade bounce through it leaving a mess of innuendo and inside-jokes.

 

In fact, I've seen posts in the "Cheers" post in the Off Topic forum where this sort of dogpile of inanity is actually suggested or requested by one of the clique when they link to their initial "llama" garbage in someone else's thread in the rest of the forums.

[+sbell111]

When there is an obvious trolling, I don't have a problem with derailment...

And who made you (or I or anyone but the mods) an arbiter of what's to be an "obvious" troll?

 

The "an" post wasn't so obvious a troll. King riched's post isn't an obvious troll.

 

The first "Cheerio" who deems a post unworthy of being left to its own discussion says something assinine about "llamas" or "the pig" or other nonsense and the rest of the General Mills crew just pour out onto the table and take over the topic. The only "derailment" an "obvious" troll needs is to be closed by the moderators. Report it, don't act like it's your own personal playland. If the thread is an issue for the forum, it'll be closed well enough without watching the Bed Spring Brigade bounce through it leaving a mess of innuendo and inside-jokes.

 

In fact, I've seen posts in the "Cheers" post in the Off Topic forum where this sort of dogpile of inanity is actually suggested or requested by one of the clique when they link to their initial "llama" garbage in someone else's thread in the rest of the forums.

Perhaps you are taking this all a bit too seriously.

[Clan Riffster]

The first "Cheerio" who deems a post unworthy of being left to its own discussion says something assinine about "llamas" or "the pig" or other nonsense and the rest of the General Mills crew just pour out onto the table and take over the topic.

A sad state of affairs exists when jugglers can belittle llamas without recompense. Truly sad.

Back on topic: To answer the OP's original question, of course you should never deviate from the original topic. Those who do should be beaten with lemmings!

[uperdooper]

i didn't see anyone beefing when this thread was hijacked. granted the thread was started in jest, but for about 2 hours most of the forums stopped except for this thread. it also had over 1000 views in an 8 hour period. more than any other thread during that time.

 

some people need to lighten up and laugh once in a while.

[+Ambrosia]

In fact, I've seen posts in the "Cheers" post in the Off Topic forum where this sort of dogpile of inanity is actually suggested or requested by one of the clique when they link to their initial "llama" garbage in someone else's thread in the rest of the forums.

I'm sorry, but that's "click".

[+Recdiver]

To drag this back on topic.

IMHO it is not right to pig pile on a floundering thread to deliberately derail it.

Not right, but oh so much fun at times, until someone gets punched in the snout.

Just Say No to Thread Derailments.

[+Ambrosia]

To drag this back on topic.

IMHO it is not right to pig pile on a floundering thread to deliberately derail it.

Not right, but oh so much fun at times, until someone gets punched in the snout.

Just Say No to Thread Derailments.

JSNTD? Doesn't quite have a ring to it.

[ju66l3r]

Perhaps you are taking this all a bit too seriously.

 

Given my usual posting styles in these forums, that's hardly very fair of you (or the others mocking and making the same suggestion).

 

I simply know the difference between levity and inanity, making a goofy comment in context and disrupting/hijacking a conversation to your own ends, or on-point humor and off-topic in-jokes.

 

The examples given in this thread show that some people here choose not to draw these lines and I think Corps is right in implying that it causes some issues with good forum behavior.

[+Recdiver]

To drag this back on topic.

IMHO it is not right to pig pile on a floundering thread to deliberately derail it.

Not right, but oh so much fun at times, until someone gets punched in the snout.

Just Say No to Thread Derailments.

JSNTD? Doesn't quite have a ring to it.

Well I'm open to suggestions for an acronym that rings true.

[+New England n00b]

When there is an obvious trolling, I don't have a problem with derailment...

And who made you (or I or anyone but the mods) an arbiter of what's to be an "obvious" troll?

 

The "an" post wasn't so obvious a troll. King riched's post isn't an obvious troll.

 

The first "Cheerio" who deems a post unworthy of being left to its own discussion says something assinine about "llamas" or "the pig" or other nonsense and the rest of the General Mills crew just pour out onto the table and take over the topic. The only "derailment" an "obvious" troll needs is to be closed by the moderators. Report it, don't act like it's your own personal playland. If the thread is an issue for the forum, it'll be closed well enough without watching the Bed Spring Brigade bounce through it leaving a mess of innuendo and inside-jokes.

 

In fact, I've seen posts in the "Cheers" post in the Off Topic forum where this sort of dogpile of inanity is actually suggested or requested by one of the clique when they link to their initial "llama" garbage in someone else's thread in the rest of the forums.

Perhaps you are taking this all a bit too seriously.

Well, poop. There goes my witty comeback.

[+Ambrosia]

Perhaps you are taking this all a bit too seriously.

 

Given my usual posting styles in these forums, that's hardly very fair of you (or the others mocking and making the same suggestion).

 

I simply know the difference between levity and inanity, making a goofy comment in context and disrupting/hijacking a conversation to your own ends, or on-point humor and off-topic in-jokes.

 

The examples given in this thread show that some people here choose not to draw these lines and I think Corps is right in implying that it causes some issues with good forum behavior.

Hm. This is why I probably don't know how to respond to this thread. I think that every situation is different, and heck, I guess I must not know the difference between levity and inanity, cause I'm just more even confused now than when this thread first started.

[+Recdiver]

When there is an obvious trolling, I don't have a problem with derailment...

And who made you (or I or anyone but the mods) an arbiter of what's to be an "obvious" troll?

 

The "an" post wasn't so obvious a troll. King riched's post isn't an obvious troll.

 

The first "Cheerio" who deems a post unworthy of being left to its own discussion says something assinine about "llamas" or "the pig" or other nonsense and the rest of the General Mills crew just pour out onto the table and take over the topic. The only "derailment" an "obvious" troll needs is to be closed by the moderators. Report it, don't act like it's your own personal playland. If the thread is an issue for the forum, it'll be closed well enough without watching the Bed Spring Brigade bounce through it leaving a mess of innuendo and inside-jokes.

 

In fact, I've seen posts in the "Cheers" post in the Off Topic forum where this sort of dogpile of inanity is actually suggested or requested by one of the clique when they link to their initial "llama" garbage in someone else's thread in the rest of the forums.

Perhaps you are taking this all a bit too seriously.

Well, poop. There goes my witty comeback.

Nothing worse than a frustrated n00b.

[+Recdiver]

Perhaps you are taking this all a bit too seriously.

 

Given my usual posting styles in these forums, that's hardly very fair of you (or the others mocking and making the same suggestion).

 

I simply know the difference between levity and inanity, making a goofy comment in context and disrupting/hijacking a conversation to your own ends, or on-point humor and off-topic in-jokes.

 

The examples given in this thread show that some people here choose not to draw these lines and I think Corps is right in implying that it causes some issues with good forum behavior.

Hm. This is why I probably don't know how to respond to this thread. I think that every situation is different, and heck, I guess I must not know the difference between levity and inanity, cause I'm just more even confused now than when this thread first started.

Quick definitions (levity) noun: lightness of manner; noun: feeling an inappropriate lack of seriousness

Quick definitions (inanity) noun: total lack of meaning or ideas

Hope this helps

[+Ambrosia]

Perhaps you are taking this all a bit too seriously.

 

Given my usual posting styles in these forums, that's hardly very fair of you (or the others mocking and making the same suggestion).

 

I simply know the difference between levity and inanity, making a goofy comment in context and disrupting/hijacking a conversation to your own ends, or on-point humor and off-topic in-jokes.

 

The examples given in this thread show that some people here choose not to draw these lines and I think Corps is right in implying that it causes some issues with good forum behavior.

Hm. This is why I probably don't know how to respond to this thread. I think that every situation is different, and heck, I guess I must not know the difference between levity and inanity, cause I'm just more even confused now than when this thread first started.

Quick definitions (levity) noun: lightness of manner; noun: feeling an inappropriate lack of seriousness

Quick definitions (inanity) noun: total lack of meaning or ideas

Hope this helps

Wow. Thanks. I needed that.

[+Recdiver]

Perhaps you are taking this all a bit too seriously.

 

Given my usual posting styles in these forums, that's hardly very fair of you (or the others mocking and making the same suggestion).

 

I simply know the difference between levity and inanity, making a goofy comment in context and disrupting/hijacking a conversation to your own ends, or on-point humor and off-topic in-jokes.

 

The examples given in this thread show that some people here choose not to draw these lines and I think Corps is right in implying that it causes some issues with good forum behavior.

Hm. This is why I probably don't know how to respond to this thread. I think that every situation is different, and heck, I guess I must not know the difference between levity and inanity, cause I'm just more even confused now than when this thread first started.

Quick definitions (levity) noun: lightness of manner; noun: feeling an inappropriate lack of seriousness

Quick definitions (inanity) noun: total lack of meaning or ideas

Hope this helps

Wow. Thanks. I needed that.

Glad I could be of some assistance.

Sorry for nudging this thread off course.

I'll leave now.

[+Ambrosia]

Perhaps you are taking this all a bit too seriously.

 

Given my usual posting styles in these forums, that's hardly very fair of you (or the others mocking and making the same suggestion).

 

I simply know the difference between levity and inanity, making a goofy comment in context and disrupting/hijacking a conversation to your own ends, or on-point humor and off-topic in-jokes.

 

The examples given in this thread show that some people here choose not to draw these lines and I think Corps is right in implying that it causes some issues with good forum behavior.

Hm. This is why I probably don't know how to respond to this thread. I think that every situation is different, and heck, I guess I must not know the difference between levity and inanity, cause I'm just more even confused now than when this thread first started.

Quick definitions (levity) noun: lightness of manner; noun: feeling an inappropriate lack of seriousness

Quick definitions (inanity) noun: total lack of meaning or ideas

Hope this helps

Wow. Thanks. I needed that.

Glad I could be of some assistance.

Sorry for nudging this thread off course.

I'll leave now.

No, no. I think that you helped the thread a lot. Maybe now that I know the difference between levity and inanity, I can formulate an appropriate response to the OP.

[+Recdiver]

Perhaps you are taking this all a bit too seriously.

 

Given my usual posting styles in these forums, that's hardly very fair of you (or the others mocking and making the same suggestion).

 

I simply know the difference between levity and inanity, making a goofy comment in context and disrupting/hijacking a conversation to your own ends, or on-point humor and off-topic in-jokes.

 

The examples given in this thread show that some people here choose not to draw these lines and I think Corps is right in implying that it causes some issues with good forum behavior.

Hm. This is why I probably don't know how to respond to this thread. I think that every situation is different, and heck, I guess I must not know the difference between levity and inanity, cause I'm just more even confused now than when this thread first started.

Quick definitions (levity) noun: lightness of manner; noun: feeling an inappropriate lack of seriousness

Quick definitions (inanity) noun: total lack of meaning or ideas

Hope this helps

Wow. Thanks. I needed that.

Glad I could be of some assistance.

Sorry for nudging this thread off course.

I'll leave now.

No, no. I think that you helped the thread a lot. Maybe now that I know the difference between levity and inanity, I can formulate an appropriate response to the OP.

No I think you are still trying to derail this thread and you keep luring me back you temptress you. Read my signature line.

[+Ambrosia]

Perhaps you are taking this all a bit too seriously.

 

Given my usual posting styles in these forums, that's hardly very fair of you (or the others mocking and making the same suggestion).

 

I simply know the difference between levity and inanity, making a goofy comment in context and disrupting/hijacking a conversation to your own ends, or on-point humor and off-topic in-jokes.

 

The examples given in this thread show that some people here choose not to draw these lines and I think Corps is right in implying that it causes some issues with good forum behavior.

Hm. This is why I probably don't know how to respond to this thread. I think that every situation is different, and heck, I guess I must not know the difference between levity and inanity, cause I'm just more even confused now than when this thread first started.

Quick definitions (levity) noun: lightness of manner; noun: feeling an inappropriate lack of seriousness

Quick definitions (inanity) noun: total lack of meaning or ideas

Hope this helps

Wow. Thanks. I needed that.

Glad I could be of some assistance.

Sorry for nudging this thread off course.

I'll leave now.

No, no. I think that you helped the thread a lot. Maybe now that I know the difference between levity and inanity, I can formulate an appropriate response to the OP.

No I think you are still trying to derail this thread and you keep luring me back you temptress you. Read my signature line.

[+Torry]

Even I have to go with the OP ... there are times we do tend to go overboard with derailing. ... especially on serious topics ... such as this one.... that have not been addressed ad nauseum.

 

It's why the Off-Topic forum was created.

Edited August 7, 2006 by Torry

[+Jhwk]

Even I have to go with the OP ... there are times we do tend to go overboard with derailing. ... especially on serious topics ... such as this one.... that have not been addressed ad nauseum.

 

It's why the Off-Topic forum was created.

but can't you see why virt's were grandfathered? I mean REALLY. And the micro assault we are under, Please!

[Trinity's Crew]

Many (or even most) of the threads around here de-rail naturally as a result of running out of track. Most topics are discussed pretty thoroughly prior to crashing and burning, so I'm not sure that we need to worry too much about it. It IS good to bring it up for discussion, though.

[Hillbilly-Rockstar]

WWJP....

 

What would Jesus Post?

[+Cache Viking]

Like many I have been involved in a derailment or two but these days I think if a thread has derailment need then the Report button is it for me. I believe it was a post by COD that made me came to this decision.

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Thanks for everyones replies and keeping it pretty civil. Hope it stays that way.

[JohnX]

What are these "topics" of which you speak?

It would have to be this thread, started by someone who joined the site for the sole purpose of posting in our forums about his extraterrestrial theories.

 

...edited for brevitey ...

 

I thought the whole episode was pretty funny, so I thought I'd share it!

The topic of this thread is "Driving Threads Off Topic", not "Funny Threads", and the original post specifically mentions moderator participation. For reference, here is the original post:

Just what the title and description says: is it ever OK for a thread to be driven off topic?

 

Also: is it OK for a group, with possible moderator collusion and/or participation, to intentionally do so?

Perhaps someone is confused about the topic of this thread, or perhaps this is a demonstration of a moderator driving a post off topic?

[+Corp Of Discovery]

What are these "topics" of which you speak?

It would have to be this thread, started by someone who joined the site for the sole purpose of posting in our forums about his extraterrestrial theories.

 

...edited for brevitey ...

 

I thought the whole episode was pretty funny, so I thought I'd share it!

The topic of this thread is "Driving Threads Off Topic", not "Funny Threads", and the original post specifically mentions moderator participation. For reference, here is the original post:

Just what the title and description says: is it ever OK for a thread to be driven off topic?

 

Also: is it OK for a group, with possible moderator collusion and/or participation, to intentionally do so?

Perhaps someone is confused about the topic of this thread, or perhaps this is a demonstration of a moderator driving a post off topic?

 

Being the OP, I think Keystone's post was fine.

 

Remember, lets keep it civil please.

[+mtn-man]

What are these "topics" of which you speak?

It would have to be this thread, started by someone who joined the site for the sole purpose of posting in our forums about his extraterrestrial theories.

 

...edited for brevitey ...

 

I thought the whole episode was pretty funny, so I thought I'd share it!

The topic of this thread is "Driving Threads Off Topic", not "Funny Threads", and the original post specifically mentions moderator participation. For reference, here is the original post:

Just what the title and description says: is it ever OK for a thread to be driven off topic?

 

Also: is it OK for a group, with possible moderator collusion and/or participation, to intentionally do so?

Perhaps someone is confused about the topic of this thread, or perhaps this is a demonstration of a moderator driving a post off topic?

 

Being the OP, I think Keystone's post was fine.

 

Remember, lets keep it civil please.

I actually see the Keystone post as totally on topic. It totally describes what the OP was talking about. Reading the topic linked easily shows that.

 

One thing I look at as a moderator in these cases is malicious intent. Sometimes there is some element of comedic relief expressed, which can take a topic off-topic. If done strictly as a *brief* expression of fun, it usually seems fine to me. In the case that Keystone described, someone came to our forums and started a non-geocaching topic and kept it going by replying to their own posts. It was derailed, and frankly, the original post was a "tinfoil hat gang" topic in my opinion. Since GPS satellites only work on earth (something that the poor OP of that topic must not comprehend), it was a non-geocaching topic.

 

The key in this instance is that I didn't see it as malicious intent. I saw that one as some folks having a bit of fun in one of the more quiet and unvisited parts of our forums. It took me a long time to even notice the post. When I did, I simply closed it. I did not see any malicious intent in the posts so I closed it and moved on.

 

As usual, if you see something that bothers and/or disturbs you, just do as Quiggle so perfectly suggested.

Click the REPORT button.

[+...The Girl]

I like girls, I like them a lot.

I'm a girl ... and not just *any* girl, I'm ...The Girl.

[+sbell111]

When there is an obvious trolling, I don't have a problem with derailment...

And who made you (or I or anyone but the mods) an arbiter of what's to be an "obvious" troll?

 

The "an" post wasn't so obvious a troll. King riched's post isn't an obvious troll.

 

The first "Cheerio" who deems a post unworthy of being left to its own discussion says something assinine about "llamas" or "the pig" or other nonsense and the rest of the General Mills crew just pour out onto the table and take over the topic. The only "derailment" an "obvious" troll needs is to be closed by the moderators. Report it, don't act like it's your own personal playland. If the thread is an issue for the forum, it'll be closed well enough without watching the Bed Spring Brigade bounce through it leaving a mess of innuendo and inside-jokes.

 

In fact, I've seen posts in the "Cheers" post in the Off Topic forum where this sort of dogpile of inanity is actually suggested or requested by one of the clique when they link to their initial "llama" garbage in someone else's thread in the rest of the forums.

Perhaps you are taking this all a bit too seriously.

Given my usual posting styles in these forums, that's hardly very fair of you (or the others mocking and making the same suggestion).

 

I simply know the difference between levity and inanity, making a goofy comment in context and disrupting/hijacking a conversation to your own ends, or on-point humor and off-topic in-jokes.

 

The examples given in this thread show that some people here choose not to draw these lines and I think Corps is right in implying that it causes some issues with good forum behavior.

I was commenting specifically on your post. You kinda went around the bend.

 

BTW, who made you (or I or anyone but the mods) an arbiter of what's the difference between levity and inanity?

 

Also, can someone please explain to me what a gurk is?

[+VegasCacheHounds]

Yes yes, please, let us all remember that every thread on the Geocaching forums is a serious matter, and no fun at all should be attempted to be had at anytime while having a serious discussion about a game.

[+cache_test_dummies]

Also, can someone please explain to me what a gurk is?

I believe the term is the result of a spelling mistake in a Report message.

 

See this post.

[+wimseyguy]

I can't stand it when someone starts a topic and then just disappears into the gloom and doesn't support their OP.

 

What's that; COD did repost a little while later on? Ohh nevermind then...

 

 

 

Deliberate derailment-bad

Injecting a little levity into a thread-usually OK.

Being mean or rude to anyone in a forum or in person-never OK.

[+hikergps]

I had cheese and applesauce for breakfast. I like cheese. I like it alot.