I just think it's really crappy that somebody can come in and intentionally derail a thread, to the point that even the mods come in and close it, but that person still gets to go and assign reputation points.
If I could have closed the thread myself, or deleted off-topic replies, I would have done so.
I'm not a mod. Was I just supposed to tell him he was off topic? That ain't my job, man.
Look back at the thread. You might disagree with my point of view, but he was the first one to take it off topic, and he was the first one to start assigning reputation.
How is this supposed to work? Not like this right?
John Roberts and abortion
Seems a bit childish to make two threads about it.
Also, look again if you think I derailed the thread.
(02-13-2019, 10:35 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]Seems a bit childish to make two threads about it.
Also, look again if you think I derailed the thread.
You're not the one who derailed it.
This thread is about figuring out who to blame for the closed thread.
The other threat is figuring out how to use the reputation button going forward.
(02-13-2019, 10:45 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]This seems whiny.
Sorry. I agree actually. But there's no other way to say it. I ain't a mod. I can't change how this stuff works. And I've said enough about it being wrong. I'd be willing to live by different set of rules.
Nearly every thread on this board gets derailed at some point. Most times the thread will naturally come back to center.
Considering the title includes the word "liberal" is it really going off topic to have an argument on the meaning of that word?
I think it's more ridiculous to close a thread where productive discussion is happening, even if that discussion isn't directly related to the original topic, but what do I know? Allowing good conversation to continue seems logical to me, but I'm not an administrator who spent months insisting that they were only here for technical purposes until they decided to become the most lock-happy mod this board has ever seen.
(02-14-2019, 09:41 AM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ]Considering the title includes the word "liberal" is it really going off topic to have an argument on the meaning of that word?
If you confine the discussion to judicial philosophy, sure. Talk about what it means that the four Democrat appointed justices have a liberal judicial philosophy. But the person who first brought up that question did not confine it that way.
Trying to define "liberal" in general is a much bigger and broader topic than judicial philosophy or abortion, and it took over the thread for that reason.
(02-14-2019, 10:17 AM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]I think it's more ridiculous to close a thread where productive discussion is happening, even if that discussion isn't directly related to the original topic, but what do I know? Allowing good conversation to continue seems logical to me, but I'm not an administrator who spent months insisting that they were only here for technical purposes until they decided to become the most lock-happy mod this board has ever seen.
Closing the thread after the off topic conversation already heated up and spread out to four pages seems like the worst possible choice.
Either stay out of it and just let it continue, or go in and delete the off topic posts and replies.
(02-14-2019, 10:30 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (02-14-2019, 09:41 AM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ]Considering the title includes the word "liberal" is it really going off topic to have an argument on the meaning of that word?
If you confine the discussion to judicial philosophy, sure. And the person who first brought up that question did not confine it that way.
Trying to define "liberal" in general is a much bigger and broader topic than judicial philosophy or abortion, and it took over the thread for that reason.
Since I'm the person you're whining about, let me ask you this: how many times in your life have you started a conversation about topic A that's naturally drifted to a broader topic B? And when that's happened, how many times have you abruptly told everyone that the conversation is over? How's that worked out for you?
(02-14-2019, 10:39 AM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ] (02-14-2019, 10:30 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]If you confine the discussion to judicial philosophy, sure. And the person who first brought up that question did not confine it that way.
Trying to define "liberal" in general is a much bigger and broader topic than judicial philosophy or abortion, and it took over the thread for that reason.
Since I'm the person you're whining about, let me ask you this: how many times in your life have you started a conversation about topic A that's naturally drifted to a broader topic B? And when that's happened, how many times have you abruptly told everyone that the conversation is over and no one is allowed to engage in it any further?
No, you actually are not the person I'm whining about. In my opinion, you, like me, were only replying to the original off topic comment.
(02-14-2019, 10:17 AM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]I think it's more ridiculous to close a thread where productive discussion is happening, even if that discussion isn't directly related to the original topic, but what do I know? Allowing good conversation to continue seems logical to me, but I'm not an administrator who spent months insisting that they were only here for technical purposes until they decided to become the most lock-happy mod this board has ever seen.
In the last post that I made before locking the thread I stated that if anyone wanted to continue the discussion a new thread could be started.
(02-14-2019, 10:59 AM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ] (02-14-2019, 10:17 AM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]I think it's more ridiculous to close a thread where productive discussion is happening, even if that discussion isn't directly related to the original topic, but what do I know? Allowing good conversation to continue seems logical to me, but I'm not an administrator who spent months insisting that they were only here for technical purposes until they decided to become the most lock-happy mod this board has ever seen.
In the last post that I made before locking the thread I stated that if anyone wanted to continue the discussion a new thread could be started.
Yes, because shutting down the conversation is a great way to stimulate it further.
(02-14-2019, 10:17 AM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]I think it's more ridiculous to close a thread where productive discussion is happening, even if that discussion isn't directly related to the original topic, but what do I know? Allowing good conversation to continue seems logical to me, but I'm not an administrator who spent months insisting that they were only here for technical purposes until they decided to become the most lock-happy mod this board has ever seen.
I feel the same, I was enjoying where the conversation was going and was actually learning some history by looking up points of reference.
Is there a policy that addresses derailed threads or is this up to the mods?
I thinking going off topic while complaining about needing to stay on topic was J.W.'s job. Without her the board is lost.
(02-14-2019, 04:59 PM)HandsomeRob86 Wrote: [ -> ]I thinking going off topic while complaining about needing to stay on topic was J.W.'s job. Without her the board is lost.
Exactly why I just went with it at the time. Don't want to be J.W.