Can you please explain-Thread Hijacking

[Rue]

It is sometimes impossible to understand when Charles decides to "moderate". The grounds he uses can be contradictory or confusing and the tool used is to announce a ban and say you have to agree to it to get back on. Then if you ask for an explanation you don't get one.

I want everyone to know I was banned for supposedly hijacking a thread by responding directly to a post on a thread that was allowed. So how could my direct response be hijacking if the post I responded to was not? That makes no logical sense. When I asked for an explanation I got no response.

I am the first to understand rules and why they are enforced, i.e., inflammatory words. Sometimes however, some posters are allowed to write things and then when challenged complain to the moderator and with due respect the moderator may be allowing this to distort their judgement on subsequent rulings. Complainers should not influence moderators in future issues simply because they complain a lot. 

I have sent three questions in asking for the above with no explanation.

Please can anyone tell me how responding directly to the words in a post that is allowed in a thread, hijacks the thread but the post being responded to, does not? Is that even possible?

Thank you.

Thread Hijacker

p.s. an explanation of what is off topic would be nice

p.s.s. do moderators understand that if they allow an off topic post, and someone responds to the off topic post, they would think because the first post was allowed, responding to it would not  be off topic-I do note sometimes there will be a warning to stay on topic, sometimes there is no warning and the entire thread is suddenly closed I can get that

[dialamah]

Yeah, I agree - if I respond to a post that is insulting or inflammatory, and there's a complaint on my post that is judged valid, then both posters (me and the other person) should be smacked.  

But, it seems Charles is the only moderator, so I can understand that it would be difficult to maintain consistency.  Can't be easy, and I do appreciate his dedication and efforts.

[Rue]

Just call me Jack and I haven't been high in years.

[bush_cheney2004]

Three strategies to consider that have usually worked for me:

1)  When responding to an exciting off topic adventure, always preface with an acknowledgement of same and urge the thread to get back on topic, endearing you forever to the mod(s)...well...at least for a minute or two.

2) Always weave some semblance of the actual topic into your response.

3) Resist the urge to gallop down the rabbit hole even further.

Edited February 15, 2020 by bush_cheney2004

[betsy]

On 2/14/2020 at 8:12 AM, Rue said:

an explanation of what is off topic would be nice

 

Taking the discussion away from the premise of the topic. 

I can give you an example:

 

 

 

Edited February 18, 2020 by betsy

[David_kor]

I was also looking for an answer :

[Tdot]

Edited April 18, 2020 by Tdot

[OftenWrong]

On 2/14/2020 at 8:12 AM, Rue said:

Then if you ask for an explanation you don't get one.

When I asked for an explanation I got no response.

I have sent three questions in asking for the above with no explanation.

p.s. an explanation of what is off topic would be nice

Exactly what part of "obey the forum rules" do you not understand???

[Rue]

Did you ask the above question? You are asking me a question about specific words that are not in question.  I in fact asked about what consitutes trolling, thread drift and high jacking because it has been very inconsistently handled in the past

These are on going concerns that go with moderation and are not specific  to the moderators who we appreciate. It's just the nature of being a referee with a whistle. I might point out confusing rulings...but always respectfully seeking clarity. Some others have as well

Given Tdot  's sudden involvement in this thread it does not surprise me.

Not only does his response make no sense with a fictitious tale about his daughter  but it again shows an attempt to incite argument where there is none to try cover his past remarks..

Tdot incites. He is an example of a troll in my opinion and a scripted spam used to target political forums.

 

Edited April 18, 2020 by Rue

[Tdot]

On April 3, 2020 at 5:31 AM, David_kor said:

I was also looking for an answer :

I hear you ... heck I even emailed the Webmaster last week LOL unfortunately it appears one of my daughters is going around here hijacking my threads/stalking my account(?)/mad hurt & upset with me because I abandoned her during her influencable years is what I've been told.

i keep begging her to accept it that "You're A Big Girl Now" but she's not buying it. She's very narcissistic/refuses to grow up.

[Tdot]

1 hour ago, Rue said:

... Tdot  's sudden involvement in this thread...

IMHO your decision to create this thread is, proof, that you suffer from grave mental disabilities causing you to peruse this great website inciting troll posts where there are none.

Your theme for this thread is a direct, complaint, about your own posting habits on this website. I can use this thread to provide links to where you have in fact:

1. stalked my account  
2. thread drifted in several of my threads
3. trolled several of my threads
4. failed at trying to hijack my threads
5. constantly namecalling me

Actually I suspect that members who are sort of like me, were the reason you created this thread thanks to their, victories, over your dumb troll posts you sent @ them.

Yes.

You realized you can't win in your foolish, strategy, so your narcissism ran to create this thread to try a different route with your expert-misery gimmick that you burden this website with.

 

Edited April 18, 2020 by Tdot

[OftenWrong]

24 minutes ago, Rue said:

Did you ask the above question?

Possibly. Or my cat was tapping the kb again. Damn you, little shoofy!

Quote

You are asking me a question about specific words that are not in question.  I in fact asked about what consitutes trolling, thread drift and high jacking because it has been very inconsistently handled in the past

These are on going concerns that go with moderation and are not specific  to the moderators who we appreciate. It's just the nature of being a referee with a whistle. I might point out confusing rulings...but always respectfully seeking clarity. Some others have as well

Well far be it from me to open up old wounds, and I can see the issue runs deep here. Rules cannot cover everything, especially the insidious nature of the human mind to find a way to break them, and get away with it. But if the rules are too strict, no one has any fun anymore. We all know it's fun and pleasurable to break the rules, and only a complete moron would even bother to dispute that, but it gets to a point where too much rule breaking is also no good.

These are quality issues. Could be like the coach on a hockey team. You get to go out and screw around a little, but if you never score or make a decent play, just screwing around all the time, you get to sit on the bench for a while.

I guess the paradigm doesn't fit if you're American. Look, imagine if you went bowling...

Quote

Tdot incites. He is an example of

Yes, he is one boring little son of a bitch.

[Tdot]

38 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Yes, he is one boring little son of a bitch.

boring = Tdot has ripped your ass to shreds wherever you trolled Tdot threads and posts, Tdot has made you look XXXL-Foolish whenever you post "often wrong" opinions to derail topics  for example... go check out how I just now annihilated your trolling effort you posted 10mins ago in my D.Trump/Michael Jackson thread.

Edited April 18, 2020 by Tdot

[OftenWrong]

18 minutes ago, Tdot said:

boring = Tdot has ripped your ass to shreds wherever you trolled Tdot threads and posts, Tdot has made you look XXXL-Foolish whenever you post "often wrong" opinions to derail topics  for example... go check out how I just now annihilated your trolling effort you posted 10mins ago in my D.Trump/Michael Jackson thread.

I cannot reply here. Please do stay on topic, Todd.

[Rue]

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

Possibly. Or my cat was tapping the kb again. Damn you, little shoofy!

Well far be it from me to open up old wounds, and I can see the issue runs deep here. Rules cannot cover everything, especially the insidious nature of the human mind to find a way to break them, and get away with it. But if the rules are too strict, no one has any fun anymore. We all know it's fun and pleasurable to break the rules, and only a complete moron would even bother to dispute that, but it gets to a point where too much rule breaking is also no good.

These are quality issues. Could be like the coach on a hockey team. You get to go out and screw around a little, but if you never score or make a decent play, just screwing around all the time, you get to sit on the bench for a while.

I guess the paradigm doesn't fit if you're American. Look, imagine if you went bowling...

Yes, he is one boring little son of a bitch.

No wound.

Yes there is one,multiple name user who you just exposed. Thank you. He came on cue. He as subtle as an elegant with diaheria.

 

 

Edited April 18, 2020 by Rue

[Tdot]

30 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

I cannot reply here. Please do stay on topic, Todd.

Check your local mirror, that's who came here attacking me/namecalling me when I had never mentioned you here even once.  

You are very deceitful and dishonest, plus you are the epitome of this thread's OP since you love to assist @Rue with perfecting the troll culture that burdens this great website.

Edited April 18, 2020 by Tdot

[Rue]

38 minutes ago, Tdot said:

Check your local mirror, that's who came here attacking me/namecalling me when I had never mentioned you here even once.  

You are very deceitful and dishonest, plus you are the epitome of this thread's OP since you love to assist @Rue with perfecting the troll culture that burdens this great website.

OP is that yew howz Andy, Aunt Bee Barney....supryz supryz looky who is here...hey Sarg wait until you see who dun cum a visitin...that's fine Gomer but I am busy...

Edited April 18, 2020 by Rue

[Argus]

On 2/14/2020 at 7:19 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

Three strategies to consider that have usually worked for me:

1)  When responding to an exciting off topic adventure, always preface with an acknowledgement of same and urge the thread to get back on topic, endearing you forever to the mod(s)...well...at least for a minute or two.

2) Always weave some semblance of the actual topic into your response.

3) Resist the urge to gallop down the rabbit hole even further.

And bush_cheney is certainly an expert in threadjacking...

Edited April 18, 2020 by Argus

[Tdot]

2 hours ago, Rue said:

OP is that yew howz Andy, Aunt Bee Barney....supryz supryz looky who is here...hey Sarg wait until you see who dun cum a visitin...that's fine Gomer but I am busy...

 

[Rue]

Ob look Charlie's asking me to listen to Helter Skelter.What next you want to send some addresses for me to dig up. Lol. Weeze  all in cage Charlie...only yers seems to have a boy by the name of Leroy anxious for you to bend down and pick up his bar of soap...ain't that a pity Charlie...why not take up gospel....Leroy seems to know how to get you to sing them high notes..

[Tdot]

3 hours ago, Rue said:

Ob look Charlie's asking me to listen to Helter Skelter.What next you want to send some addresses for me to dig up. Lol. Weeze  all in cage Charlie...only yers seems to have a boy by the name of Leroy anxious for you to bend down and pick up his bar of soap...ain't that a pity Charlie...why not take up gospel....Leroy seems to know how to get you to sing them high notes..

 

 

 

[Rue]

Stop bending over and can the mating signal...you mix me up with Leroy..the only think I carry is disinfectant and a water hose.

 

Edited April 18, 2020 by Rue

[Tdot]

8 hours ago, Tdot said:

IMHO your decision to create this thread is, proof, that you suffer from grave mental disabilities causing you to peruse this great website inciting troll posts where there are none.

Your theme for this thread is a direct, complaint, about your own posting habits on this website. I can use this thread to provide links to where you have in fact:

1. stalked my account  
2. thread drifted in several of my threads
3. trolled several of my threads
4. failed at trying to hijack my threads
5. constantly namecalling me

Actually I suspect that members who are sort of like me, were the reason you created this thread thanks to their, victories, over your dumb troll posts you sent @ them.

Yes.

You realized you can't win in your foolish, strategy, so your narcissism ran to create this thread to try a different route with your expert-misery gimmick that you burden this website with.

 

 

[Infidel Dog]

It is interesting though. 

This thing being called "thread hijacking" here seems like a thing I've seen elsewhere under a different term. The 'strawman argument.'

What I've seen happen elsewhere goes something like this - one member appears to be winning an argument with superior reasoning and weight of evidence. The other beleaguered and blatantly beaten member who initiated the original argument deflects to a tangential topic he feels more comfortable with. He creates a strawman he feels he'll have better luck attacking. The other guy was most likely bored thumping the guy around the block on the original topic and it seems done anyway so he follows the guy over to his strawman argument and proceeds to thump him there too - at which point the thumpee accuses him of creating a strawman. 

It always reminds of high school fights where a guy gets invited out after school to battle behind the bleachers, thumps the provoker but gets caught fighting and gets punished - it would seem - for being the winner. The loser walks.

Judging such things always seems arbitrary and often wrong to me. In fact...have I just hijacked this thread? If I have, I apologize. It wasn't my intention. I just thought my observation was interesting, is all. But if I get judged for it I will feel wronged. 

Edited May 9, 2020 by Infidel Dog

[Tdot]

On May 9, 2020 at 12:07 PM, Infidel Dog said:

It is interesting though. 

This thing being called "thread hijacking" here seems like a thing I've seen elsewhere under a different term. The 'strawman argument.'

What I've seen happen elsewhere goes something like this - one member appears to be winning an argument with superior reasoning and weight of evidence. The other beleaguered and blatantly beaten member who initiated the original argument deflects to a tangential topic he feels more comfortable with. He creates a strawman he feels he'll have better luck attacking. The other guy was most likely bored thumping the guy around the block on the original topic and it seems done anyway so he follows the guy over to his strawman argument and proceeds to thump him there too - at which point the thumpee accuses him of creating a strawman. 

Yes, you accurately described @Rue in your analysis here.  He should change his username to Logical Fallacy's strawman, eh? lol

Edited May 10, 2020 by Tdot