Create Account



The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
Going off topic

#1
(This post was last modified: 02-13-2019, 09:21 PM by mikesez.)

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?
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#2

What thread?
Reply

#3

John Roberts and abortion
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#4
(This post was last modified: 02-13-2019, 10:39 PM by JagNGeorgia.)

Seems a bit childish to make two threads about it.

Also, look again if you think I derailed the thread.
Reply

#5

(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.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#6

This seems whiny.
The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. Power is what all messiahs really seek: not the chance to serve. - H.L. Mencken
Reply

#7
(This post was last modified: 02-13-2019, 10:52 PM by mikesez.)

(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.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#8

Nearly every thread on this board gets derailed at some point. Most times the thread will naturally come back to center.
[Image: Ben-Roethlisberger_Lerentee-McCary-Sack_...ayoffs.jpg]
Reply

#9

Considering the title includes the word "liberal" is it really going off topic to have an argument on the meaning of that word?



                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"
Reply

#10

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.


With all the morons on this team, it only makes sense we'd keep one around to coach it.

Reply

#11
(This post was last modified: 02-14-2019, 10:37 AM by mikesez.)

(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.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#12

(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.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#13
(This post was last modified: 02-14-2019, 10:40 AM by TJBender.)

(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?


With all the morons on this team, it only makes sense we'd keep one around to coach it.

Reply

#14

(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.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#15

(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.


There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.
Reply

#16

(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.


With all the morons on this team, it only makes sense we'd keep one around to coach it.

Reply

#17

(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.
Original Season Ticket Holder


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Reply

#18
(This post was last modified: 02-14-2019, 04:38 PM by JagNGeorgia.)

Is there a policy that addresses derailed threads or is this up to the mods?
Reply

#19

I thinking going off topic while complaining about needing to stay on topic was J.W.'s job. Without her the board is lost.


Yes, it's improvement, but it's Blaine Gabbert 2012 level improvement. - Pirkster

http://youtu.be/ouGM3NWpjxk The Home Hypnotist!

http://youtu.be/XQRFkn0Ly3A Media on the Brain Link!
 
Quote:Peyton must store oxygen in that forehead of his. No way I'd still be alive after all that choking.
 
Reply

#20

(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.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply




Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.


ABOUT US
The Jungle Forums is the Jaguars' biggest fan message board. Talking about the Jags since 2006, the Jungle was the team-endorsed home of all things Jaguars.

Since 2017, the Jungle is now independent of the team but still run by the same crew. We are here to support and discuss all things Jaguars and all things Duval!