Have you ever got real confused when you have read threads?

[Stylesjl]

When for example you read the title of something but you click on a different thread and then you are utterly confused when you realise it is talking about something completely diffrent

For example i read the title "Remember when we sent the inspectors, pulled them out and invaded anyway?" and then i clicked on the "Creationism- An example" and was suprised and confused when it wasn't talking about Iraq and weapons inspectors until i checked the title and realised i was in the wrong thread

 

[Bluemofia]

Not often.

I hover over the links and read the first sentence before clicking on it.

 

[Xanikk999]

I do when the poster puts a long news story in. If its not particularly interesting i dont read much of it and i try to summarize it. That leads to sometimes inaccurate reflections in my post for that thread.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Since I mostly stick to the threads about religion, and since most of those meander quite a bit from the OP, I think that most of my posts are pretty much interchangeable between threads. The only one that really stands out to me is the Babe Thread.

 

[The Yankee]

I've even posted in the wrong thread because I was that confused!

 

[Riesstiu IV]

No, Never!

Edit: Wrong Thread.

 

[Mirc]

It happened to me about 3 times to post in a thread what I wanted to post in another one.

 

[Sidhe]

All the time, it's actually sometimes a pleasant mistake, because you end up in a thread which on the surface you wouldn't touch with a barge pole but in fact is quite interresting.

 

[Perfection]

It never fazes me, the threads here are usually so threadjacked anyways that the thread title pretty much worthless.

 

[Sidhe]

If people in threads just kept to the thread title they would be sterile and boring, why people complain about this is a mystery to me, people aren't linear they do not think in logical progression, why would anyone expect any thread to proceed in a way inconsistent with the way humans think? And in fact discuss? It's bewilderingly odd, the rules are there about threadjacking normally but there's a good reason people ignore them, because following rules in a discussion drains it of colour. You should have the decency to apologise, but not for bringing a dab of life to a thread that has otherwise died, if you believe threadjacking is so grevious then steer clear of forums is my advice, it's not going to get any better.

Of course your comment has just created a thread jack, so really I'd keep shtum about it

 

[A'AbarachAmadan]

I don't understand, could you explain further.

 

[Sidhe]

sure I believe the definition of thread jacking is to divert a topic of conversation away from it's original message or question in the OP and thus obscure to readers who haven't followed all the posts exactly what the thread is about, thus thread jacking or thread high jacking. Much like Hijacking on the internet when a site takes control of your browser and sends you to BIGMASSIVEJUBBLIES.com instead of UKgardening.com.

See is that clear.

 

[Aramazd]

I have done that I couple times, but I normally figure it out really quick and go back and click on the right thread.

 

[The 777 Hoax]

I've done that a few times, but not very often.

 

[Technocactus]

The only one that really stands out to me is the Babe Thread.

And indeed, your pictures contribute greatly. Particularly Emily VanCamp.

And I've never been confused. Ever. About anything.