Gori the Grey
The Poster
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2009
- Messages
- 12,136
I suspect this happens most frequently in Off Topic.
Sometimes discussion in a thread will go off on a tangent from the supposed topic of that thread and so a moderator will split it off as a new thread.
That makes sense to do, but, two things:
First, if all the moderator does is gather up all of the posts that are on that tangent, then there's not necessarily a good OP for the new thread; it's just the first post that was deemed to go off tangent, but it might have all kinds of backwards references that aren't comprehensible to people who start reading the new thread. It was never intended as an OP, so it might not clearly frame some topic for discussion. Etc.
and
The first post in the new thread might be by a poster who never thought his post would be the start of a new thread and doesn't want "ownership" for a thread under that name.
The example that is prompting this observation is a spin-off from the 2024 Presidential Election thread into a Christianity in America thread, where several posters have asked "what is this thread about"?
I hate to create extra work for the mods, but it seems that the new thread needs a little headnote, probably written by the mod, but up to the standards expected of an OP: that it explicitly lays out some question to be addressed.
So, e.g. for this case: "In the 2024 Presidential Election thread, discussion went off on a tangent about the extent to which Christians can be thought of as a persecuted group within American society." The mod would have to summarize the new question that had arisen that energized discussion in the tangent and put that before people who are coming cold to the topic.
That would let people track back to where in the original thread the tangential discussion had arisen, and it would let newcomers know the new topic.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sometimes discussion in a thread will go off on a tangent from the supposed topic of that thread and so a moderator will split it off as a new thread.
That makes sense to do, but, two things:
First, if all the moderator does is gather up all of the posts that are on that tangent, then there's not necessarily a good OP for the new thread; it's just the first post that was deemed to go off tangent, but it might have all kinds of backwards references that aren't comprehensible to people who start reading the new thread. It was never intended as an OP, so it might not clearly frame some topic for discussion. Etc.
and
The first post in the new thread might be by a poster who never thought his post would be the start of a new thread and doesn't want "ownership" for a thread under that name.
The example that is prompting this observation is a spin-off from the 2024 Presidential Election thread into a Christianity in America thread, where several posters have asked "what is this thread about"?
I hate to create extra work for the mods, but it seems that the new thread needs a little headnote, probably written by the mod, but up to the standards expected of an OP: that it explicitly lays out some question to be addressed.
So, e.g. for this case: "In the 2024 Presidential Election thread, discussion went off on a tangent about the extent to which Christians can be thought of as a persecuted group within American society." The mod would have to summarize the new question that had arisen that energized discussion in the tangent and put that before people who are coming cold to the topic.
That would let people track back to where in the original thread the tangential discussion had arisen, and it would let newcomers know the new topic.
Thank you for your consideration.