PDA

View Full Version : Thread Ownership



CharlieX
2010-Jan-30, 10:50 AM
Hello...

I have noticed a certain idea. When it comes to posting.

If someone starts a thread..and people want to respond to the thread creator that is good.

What is supposed to happen is someone posts a thread than other people respond to the poster...thats it!

But what I see is people responding to my post and then other people responding to the responder and then engaging in a conversation with each other in the initial 'Threader's' space. That is not good.

If someone starts a thread the responders job is to respond to the initial question.

If someone wants to talk about other issues related to the same theme they should start their own thread...not use someone else's thread space.

I like all responses...but if I want to respond to a different confersation that people are having I should be looking for a new thread that they have started.

I short time ago..I emailed someone with a question...and a few days later I got a response..then I found at the bottom of the email text...communication of some sort to a stranger.

Its like.. I find that to be rude. If you wanted to communicate to that person why not simple send them an email addressed to them.

Anyone have any similar experiences or would like to respond?
Bye
C:confused:

HenrikOlsen
2010-Jan-30, 11:42 AM
Why do you think you can just come in and dictate how everyone is supposed to use their place?

The way discussions work here has developed over several years, by several thousand posts and posters and with few exceptions works quit well.

cosmocrazy
2010-Jan-30, 11:58 AM
Hi Charlie, and welcome to BAUT!

One of the reasons threads are open to discussion is so that there are not loads of threads going on basically about the same or related subjects. You must appreciate that it makes sense to do it this way rather than clogging the site up with unnecessary threads. If you start a thread and feel that it is going off topic then you are quite welcome to ask a moderator to intervene and get things back on track.

Buttercup
2010-Jan-30, 01:39 PM
Um...when first getting online in 1998 I sort of had that attitude towards threads I'd begun: I wanted some control over most of them. Outright hijacking of a thread is wrong/rude (and here it's subject to corrective action) of course. However, I quickly learned that sometimes -- and actually often -- it's far more rewarding to "allow" a thread to take on a life of its own. Another person may chime in on a slightly different note or see things from a different angle; this can become swiftly developed and you've a "new and improved" thread and learning new things. :)

It doesn't always work out that way, but more often DOES.

Hope this helps.

Argos
2010-Jan-30, 02:04 PM
What happens is that parallel discussions develop within the topic. Perfectly acceptable [and Iīd say important to the overall vitality of the discussions].

hhEb09'1
2010-Jan-30, 02:16 PM
Anyone have any similar experiences or would like to respond?
I don't have much to add that hasn't been said before, but the title of this thread is Thread Ownership. In a nutshell, the original poster of a thread does not own the thread, nor control it in any way. But we do try to be reasonable. And the regulations differ between our subforums--for instance, a discussion about another ATM theory in an ATM thread would probably not be allowed at all.

Welcome to BAUT!

eric_marsh
2010-Jan-30, 02:28 PM
Common courtesy dictates that those who participate in a thread try to stay more or less on topic but beyond that pretty much anything goes. The person who started the thread does not necessarily own nor control it. PMs are the preferred venue for one to one conversation.

Moose
2010-Jan-30, 02:43 PM
But what I see is people responding to my post and then other people responding to the responder and then engaging in a conversation with each other in the initial 'Threader's' space. That is not good.

Actually no, it's the very nature of a publicly accessible thread in space that has been made accessible to the public. The moment you hit submit on a newly created thread, that thread is no longer yours.

The only real exceptions are threads in which Rule 13 apply, especially where there is a time limit in play. ATM and, to a lesser extent, CT) operate that way.

orionjim
2010-Jan-30, 03:25 PM
From what Iíve observed from reading and participating in this forum is sometimes someone will start a thread and never return. If the thread is interesting people will post and yes the subject will change. However if the person that starts the thread is involved in the conversation they can steer it back on course.


One other thing Iíve noticed: a good sense of humor goes a long way.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Jan-30, 05:10 PM
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that when a tread goes wildly off target, it's normally a sign that no one has any more to add to the original topic.

At that time the original poster (or anyone else) can request that the thread be closed with the reason that the subject's been discussed enough.
It's not likely to happen if then discussion is still happening especially if the one requesting is losing the discussion, as thread closure is not a way to win an argument, but if the main subject has been covered and the thread has started to go all over the place, the chances are fairly high that such a request would be honored.

Swift
2010-Jan-30, 07:58 PM
I think this is a better area for this thread.

kleindoofy
2010-Jan-30, 08:26 PM
Hey, CharlieX.

Welcome to the internet.

Jeff Root
2010-Jan-31, 12:15 AM
The way discussions work here has developed over several years, by
several thousand posts...
Over one and a half million posts!

-- Jeff, changing the subject, in Minneapolis