Topics going off track

[erideni]

Morning, Morning, Good Morning to everyone.

I just had to change it out of the "Giving something back" thread. lol

Raven, welcome to the discussion. Once again I agree with what you are saying as well as the great point of view Reviewom NLB.

How about this for a suggestion then. What about once a topic goes off discussion say mpter 5 posts it gets moved by the moderators to a new topic with a heading that is more relevant to the new points that are getting discussed. The reason behind this is so if someone has a valid point of view to the new topic but has not logged on for several days then he/she may be able to contribute under the appropriate heading. If they are unaware this particular discussion is taking place under a thread that they have no interest in how then are they to make a point of contention or support. How many contributers to this forum may go away for a few days and come back to see that their are various topics taking place but also their is only couple that we might have interest in. Whilst unknowingly their is a topic that is having great debate that we may have had experience in and could add valuable feedback going on under a title that we might have no interest in.

What you were saying in your post Raven

Let's say "James" writes a review of "Jane" who works at "The Big Red House".

"Steve" reads James's review and starts thinking.... "Hmmm, Jane sounds a lot like "Jill" at "The Small Blue House" and posts a reply saying "Hey guys, if you think Jane is good you should try Jill at The Small Blue House". Invariably, this will be followed by a flurry of posts asking questions about Jill, eg: "What does she look like?", "When does she work?", "Does she do xxxxxx?", "Where can I find Jill?" and so the discussion goes off topic.

In my opinion you are spot on. But my point is what type advertising is that for Jill or Jane and what about all those people who are interested in seeing Jill but don't know that she exists because the point has come accross under a title Janes Review. On top of this poor Jane is sitting back saying I thought that this review was suppose to be about me and who the hell is this Jill taking up my good review.

I look forward to your response

Regards


Crackers

 

[Des]

Arbie!!!!!
How did you do that :?:

 

[Ansell A]

Hehe

Wouldn't you like to know :wink:

But that would take the topic off track lol but I better not tell :twisted:

xox
arbie.

 

[Mahesh N]

Offtopic posts

Hi Crackers,

First, let me say that I am not disagreeing with you and that it would preferable that discussions stay on topic as far as possible.

Certainly in the case of the example I presented, I think it might be preferable to start a new discussion about someone entirely different to the subject of the original discussion.

However, look at the situation that you have created here by starting a new thread to address my previous response. My own personal view is that this could have been continued in the original thread, as it is a continuation of an existing discussion. We now have, in my view, a Reviewagmented discussion. :!:

To use your own analogy, let's say someone has just logged in mpter a few days absence. They will see the original discussion "Giving Something Back" and this discussion "Topics going off track" and not necessarily know that they are related. Someone may well respond to the original discussion without realising that it has been continued here. The end result is that people wishing to follow this discussion now have to follow two threads instead of one to get the full picture.

So what do we do? Whilst we appreciate the suggestion to split a discussion mpter a specified number of off-topic posts, I think it is preferable to evaluate each discussion on an individual basis and use a commonsense approach. As moderators, we do confer wherever possible if it looks like some form of action is required. I think most would agree that a flexible approach is far more preferable to a rigid "you may say what you like as long as you say it the way we want you to" regime.

cheers,

Raven

 

[djeter_girl_2]

Moving the others over

Hiya Raven,

Firstly I appreciate this discussion for what it is. A moderator and a forum contributor discussing a point with different perspective but both wanting the same result. "A way for the forum to run as smoothly and as openly as possible with minimal interruptions Reviewom moderators and the feeling for contributors to be open on what points they want to put across".

If you take my post under the heading of "Giving Something Back", to me is prime example of what I have been trying to say. I feel that if a topic goes off track on a point, it takes away the true spirit in which the topic was originally put up. In this example I was trying to put across a point to help Nikki, her business and this forum. Unfortunately on that topic it hasn't had the desired effect in which the post was originally made. Obviously the their is can be a few reasons for this- The way it was presented, The topic heading, etc, etc. One of these etc. could very well be the topic going off track.

As you stated in your post about a topic being "Reviewagmented". I do not mean this as a pointing of the finger as a matter a fact I don't know much about computers or how long it would take to do it if it was possible. But would it of not been better for a moderator to move all bar the points of discussion in relation to the topic heading over to this heading. That way the original post would have been taken and contributed in the way it was intended. Not that I am saying that people would of contributed to it but they would of been given an opportunity to do so.

Once again Raven I appreciate this discussion and for the spirit that it has been taken in.

Regards



Crackers