Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="LightPhoenix" data-source="post: 5095079" data-attributes="member: 115">I think there's merit to the idea that whoever started the thread has some say as to posts being off-topic.&nbsp; I wouldn't go so far as to say they dictate what is off-topic or not; only mods really have the power to dictate how to post or how not to post on the boards.&nbsp; However, if the original poster of a discussion asks that things be moved back on topic, I think that warrants some consideration from other posters.&nbsp; Otherwise, that is essentially a thread-jack.I think that &quot;off-topic&quot; itself does have a definition, and can broadly be determined by looking at the thread.&nbsp; If a post is essentially ignoring the topic of the discussion at hand, that is off-topic.&nbsp; That doesn't mean the conversation can't grow organically, and with a message board may be thought of more like a tree.&nbsp; However, to use this thread as an example, the threads on disco are clearly off-topic, despite the rest of Nifft's post that is on-topic.&nbsp; Obviously this is a clear cut example, but generally applicable.I have to entirely disagree with this though.&nbsp; Simply because a poster has posted to a thread to their satisfaction, that doesn't open the gates for off-topic stuff.&nbsp; While it might be the end of the discussion for the specific poster, it might not be the end of the discussion for the original poster or other posters.I know we're all being silly in this thread, and overall the board is pretty light-hearted and jolly.&nbsp; However, if (for example) Vyvyan Basterd steps in and asks us to please take it elsewhere, I think we have an obligation to do so.&nbsp; After all, the stuff about the disco isn't actually contributing to the thread discussion.Unless, of course, I just made it contributing, in which case my head hurts.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="LightPhoenix, post: 5095079, member: 115"] I think there's merit to the idea that whoever started the thread has some say as to posts being off-topic. I wouldn't go so far as to say they [I]dictate[/I] what is off-topic or not; only mods really have the power to dictate how to post or how not to post on the boards. However, if the original poster of a discussion asks that things be moved back on topic, I think that warrants some consideration from other posters. Otherwise, that is essentially a thread-jack. I think that "off-topic" itself does have a definition, and can broadly be determined by looking at the thread. If a post is essentially ignoring the topic of the discussion at hand, that is off-topic. That doesn't mean the conversation can't grow organically, and with a message board may be thought of more like a tree. However, to use this thread as an example, the threads on disco are clearly off-topic, despite the rest of Nifft's post that is on-topic. Obviously this is a clear cut example, but generally applicable. I have to entirely disagree with this though. Simply because a poster has posted to a thread to their satisfaction, that doesn't open the gates for off-topic stuff. While it might be the end of the discussion for the specific poster, it might not be the end of the discussion for the original poster or other posters. I know we're all being silly in this thread, and overall the board is pretty light-hearted and jolly. However, if (for example) Vyvyan Basterd steps in and asks us to please take it elsewhere, I think we have an obligation to do so. After all, the stuff about the disco isn't actually contributing to the thread discussion. Unless, of course, I just made it contributing, in which case my head hurts. :p [/QUOTE]

Verification