Keeping Threads On Topic

[Dave in Green]

Many people visit ZN.O only to get news and factual information. They aren't interested in our opinions about how ZN.O is run, who says what about whom, etc. It's unfair to them to be forced to have to wade through off-topic discussion to get the news they came looking for.

On the other hand, many people obviously have strong feelings about things that go beyond just the news. Otherwise, so many threads wouldn't go so far off topic with so many people contributing so many off-topic posts.

I'd like to suggest a solution that would benefit both those only interested in news and factual information as well as those who have something to say beyond that:

When you're reading through a football, basketball or other thread and see something you want to comment on that doesn't directly pertain to that post's topic, post your response in another thread -- either a new or existing one -- and post a link to your response in the original thread with a comment such as: I have a comment that's off-topic to this thread that I've posted here: (link to your other post). In other words, what I did in "The Lone Ranger rides for Akron" thread to give people the option to come read this thread.

That way, the original conversation can go on uninterrupted, and anyone interested in comments beyond the immediate subject can follow the link.

Maybe someone can think of a better way to do this. I'd be interested in everyone's input.

I really believe that something like this would be a big plus for all ZN.O members and visitors.

[zipdiehard]

I agree 100%. Wading through six pages of insults and OSU rants gets old fast. We sometimes don't get 4 or 5 comments in before it spins wildly out of control.

[skip-zip]

I agree 100%. Wading through six pages of insults and OSU rants gets old fast. We sometimes don't get 4 or 5 comments in before it spins wildly out of control.

Insults...it goes without saying. OSWho bashing?....were Zips fans. How do you think it would go over if you went to a Duke site and asked them to stop cutting on UNC?

[Dave in Green]

Thanks for the input. I'm not sure if we'll be able to get everyone onboard for this. But I'm thinking that this is what I'm going to start doing from now on if I have an off-topic comment in a thread that's drifting off topic. Maybe we'll get something good started.

Still open to input from others if there's a better way to make ZN.O a better place for more people.

[Doug Snyder]

Thanks for the input. I'm not sure if we'll be able to get everyone onboard for this. But I'm thinking that this is what I'm going to start doing from now on if I have an off-topic comment in a thread that's drifting off topic. Maybe we'll get something good started.

Still open to input from others if there's a better way to make ZN.O a better place for more people.

I agree 100%

[zipdiehard]

I agree 100%. Wading through six pages of insults and OSU rants gets old fast. We sometimes don't get 4 or 5 comments in before it spins wildly out of control.

Insults...it goes without saying. OSWho bashing?....were Zips fans. How do you think it would go over if you went to a Duke site and asked them to stop cutting on UNC?

Please check the title of this post... I was refering to the numerous unrelated OSU bashes that pop up and then take over a post.

[Dave in Green]

The tOSU holy wars are only partially related to keeping threads on topic.

While it's true that some of these battles begin as a result of off-topic expressions of dislike for tOSU in threads not directly related to tOSU, this happens less often than with Can't. No one complains about anti-Can't OT remarks, but a few object to anti-tOSU OT remarks.

Because Zips fans are so divided in their opinions of tOSU, it can be a divisive issue on a Zips fan forum. Some of the remarks can become personal and mean-spirited.

But, really, the extended tOSU holy wars are largely waged by a small number of posters. There is already a remedy available for those who wish not to have to wade through this stuff on ZN.O. It's called the Ignore feature. It can be found under My Controls, Options, Manage Ignored Users.

If there are a few posters on ZN.O whose remarks on tOSU or any other subject you wish to no longer see, just add their screen names in the Manage Ignored Users field and, for you, they will magically cease to exist.

[Dr Z]

There is already a remedy available for those who wish not to have to wade through this stuff on ZN.O. It's called the Ignore feature. It can be found under My Controls, Options, Manage Ignored Users. If there are a few posters on ZN.O whose remarks on tOSU or any other subject you wish to no longer see, just add their screen names in the Manage Ignored Users field and, for you, they will magically cease to exist.

Good point. Here is a nice How to on the subject.

[zipdiehard]

Thanks. OSU was only being used as an example of how the threads go off topic. Can't remarks are another one, as are OU, Lebron, etc..

[zen]

As a forum administrator, I'd just like to say that if a thread goes off topic, all you have to do is report it to a moderator. I think that this is particularly true if it goes blatantly off topic, rather than going on a tangent, because sometimes conceptual tangents are still relevant to a topic and can be worked out in same thread.

But I don't have this problem so much because I generally ran (run) off topic communities.

I am also aware that some people like to whine about OT posts specifically when they disagree with the premise and would enjoy a little bit of censorship.

[Dave in Green]

Always good to get input from someone with forum administrative experience.

One thing about ZN.O is that I think the adminstrators are pretty much on top of most threads and can see things going off topic without needing to be told. But having forum members report OT posts would at least give the administrators an opportunity to see how much unhappiness there is among the members.

You make a really good point about different people being sensitive to different things going OT. If the general drift of OT discussion supports one's beliefs, one can be less likely to be offended by the OT drift.

But there are also many people who just tire of the same old sniping over the same old subjects regardless of which side of the debate may happen to be prevailing. There's no reason that reasonable forum members can't get together and agree to try to do something about it without hassling the administrators.

[zen]

But there are also many people who just tire of the same old sniping over the same old subjects regardless of which side of the debate may happen to be prevailing. There's no reason that reasonable forum members can't get together and agree to try to do something about it without hassling the administrators.

I tend to think that people who do something like that would endure a fair level of social scorn.

I have witnessed that active online communities rather effectively police themselves, though this occasionally falls prey to subjective social judgement rather than some sort of lofty unbiased objective, for the most part staff can sniff out such factional bullying, and members tend to quell excessive trolling by themselves.

[johnnyzip84]

I dropped in here a little late. What were you all talking about?

[Dave in Green]

As mentioned in this thread's opening post, I started this thread as an extension of "The Lone Ranger rides for Akron" thread when it started veering off topic, and put a link to this thread in that thread.

The purpose of this thread is to discuss ways to deal with OT threads in the future. My thinking is that all it takes is one person to start a new thread dealing with the topic that took the original thread off topic, post a link to the new thread in the original thread, and hope that the original thread then stays on topic while the off-topic discussion moves over to the new thread.

Hope that explains it in a nutshell.

[johnnyzip84]

As mentioned in this thread's opening post, I started this thread as an extension of "The Lone Ranger rides for Akron" thread when it started veering off topic, and put a link to this thread in that thread.

The purpose of this thread is to discuss ways to deal with OT threads in the future. My thinking is that all it takes is one person to start a new thread dealing with the topic that took the original thread off topic, post a link to the new thread in the original thread, and hope that the original thread then stays on topic while the off-topic discussion moves over to the new thread.

Hope that explains it in a nutshell.

Sorry, Dave. I was just being a smart ass thinking it might be funny to muddle a thread having to do with keeping threads on topic. Carry on!

[Dave in Green]

Gotta love it when someone on ZN.O owns up to being a smart ass. I can identify with that.

No problem at all, johnnyzip84.

[zen]

I dropped in here a little late. What were you all talking about?

OH! THERE HE GOES AGAIN! ALL GOING ON ABOUT "what are you talking about?". I AM SO TIRED OF IT!?!!!11