Hijacking Threads

[+ Lucky]

One can never be sure that a thread started stays on topic. Once created, a thread takes on a life of its own. But I do wonder why some people intentionally hijack threads, showing no respect for the person who started the thread and what he was trying to accomplish.

 

Why not just start your own thread if you think what you have to say is so important? It's easy enough to do.

[Rick Munroe]

Let me give you the wikipedia definition of thread hijacking:

 

"Thread hijacking in internet forum communication is the act of steering a discussion off-topic by discussing a subject entirely unrelated to the subject at hand."

 

For the most part, whenever I have been accused of "hijacking," it really hasn't been hijacking. Usually I see something in the topic that triggers something else -- related to the topic -- in my mind, and I add my 2 cents. I think of it as expanding the conversation (and I don't mind at all when others do it to threads I've begun). For example, in the Indian joke thread, I'd always wondered if it were true that we're not supposed to say "Indian" anymore, because you still see it sometimes and yet I'd thought it was taboo. So, I asked. Now, according to wikipedia, that was not thread hijacking, because it wasn't "entirely unrelated to the subject." The subject was Indians, and my post was about Indians. If someone else had replied to the joke and said, "That was very funny; here's another joke you might like" and then posted a new joke -- not about Indians or testicles -- I'll bet you wouldn't accuse that person of thread hijacking, but in reality, that would be more of a hijack since the new joke had nothing to do with Indians or testicles, which were the "subjects at hand."

 

Is this the part where I say "Stepping off my soapbox"? I never understood that expression, but I know it's usually inserted here.

[Guest PWIT]

>Is this the part where I say "Stepping off my

>soapbox"?

 

Soapboxes are definitely off topic. :+

[+ deej]

>>Is this the part where I say "Stepping off my

>>soapbox"?

>

>Soapboxes are definitely off topic. :+

 

Mentioning off topic topics is off topic. :+

[Rick Munroe]

>>Soapboxes are definitely off topic. :+

>

>Mentioning off topic topics is off topic. :+

 

Now everybody's a smart-ass on here!

[Guy Fawkes]

Wait a minute; "A Smart Ass" is off-topic? Naw....Couldn't be.

[Epigonos]

Rick I agree completely with your point. I know, for a fact, that I am as guilty as you are regarding this issue. I also believe that there is nothing wrong with "EXPANDING" a thread. I have observed, over a number of years, that many threads that have started out very limited and not terribly interesting have developed into extremely interesting and relevant ones.

[Rick Munroe]

>I have observed, over a number of years, that many

>threads that have started out very limited and not terribly

>interesting have developed into extremely interesting and

>relevant ones.

 

Absolutely, and sometimes they devolve into pissing matches, but hey, that's life. You gotta roll with it.

[Rick Munroe]

>Wait a minute; "A Smart Ass" is off-topic?

>Naw....Couldn't be.

 

OK, wait another minute; if everyone is going to be a smart ass, I'm going to have to change my signature to "The Original Smart Ass." I feel like my brand is being watered down.

[Guest up4fun]

Hi,

 

The soapbox reference comes from merry old England where, in Hyde Park, common citizens or anybody else is allowed to provide an almost unfettered public and verbal dissertation of their beliefs. They stand on a soapbox (if available) or any other box...there ya go! :-)

[Rick Munroe]

Thanks! I always thought it had something to do with soap operas. I know I could have googled it but you saved me the trouble.