The Derailed Thread stinks.

[Diafel]

Moving snippets of conversation (because that's what these are-conversations)to one thread only serves to make both the original thread and the derailed thread and all their replies confusing and extremely hard to follow.
I look at every thread as being a conversation. You wouldn't stop a normal conversation between any number of people and force them back on to the original topic just because the topic changed, would you? It's a NATURAL thing. Conversations flow and change in a natural way. That's what conversations are!
Why the big deal about cutting up threads and moving them to one big unintelligible mish-mash? Makes ZERO sense and is highly annoying to come on here after a day or two when following a thread, only to find it's been hacked to pieces and placed in the derailed thread and is now impossible to follow who said what to whose reply.
Not exactly conducive to CONVERSATION. And many of those things that have been moved to the mish-mash are highly educational to EVERYONE. Good job!
If you're that concerned about keeping things only on the original topic, why not just close the thread completely as soon as it starts to veer? At least that way it won't be such a mess to try and read.
/end rant

 

[Dan Hutter]

I agree with you Diafel but it's the best option we have. People piss and moan about off topic posts. Not to mention some people purposely drive a topic off topic when they don't like the topic or answer given. Closed threads are another issue completely. We get accused of being censors and/or dictators when we pull or close threads. :rolleyespill:

The off topic thread leaves the original conversation in place and gives a place forthe new conversation. FWIW, When I split threads I do try and grab the whole branch of the conversation to the new the thread so loose ends aren't hanging around in the original thread.

 

[DJCC]

There is no need to close a thread when it starts to go south just to have another one started about the same thing. We used to delete post that derailed that thread, we could go back to doing that but then people start crying because thier post got deleted.

 

[Diafel]

I don't think deleting is the solution either, but why not close the thread and leave the option of allowing the posters to start a new one on that topic, or just leave the threads alone and let the whiners whine or suck it up as they see fit?
After all, conversations are a naturally evolving thing. They aren't static and if people would realize that, I think there would be less whining about it.
Just ask yourselves this: "If this were actual people talking together, would you demand that they stay completely on the original topic, or would you allow the conversation to flow naturally?".

 

[DJCC]

I don't think deleting is the solution either, but why not close the thread and leave the option of allowing the posters to start a new one on that topic, or just leave the threads alone and let the whiners whine or suck it up as they see fit?
After all, conversations are a naturally evolving thing. They aren't static and if people would realize that, I think there would be less whining about it.
Just ask yourselves this: "If this were actual people talking together, would you demand that they stay completely on the original topic, or would you allow the conversation to flow naturally?".

Threads need to stay on topic, everyone hates when they are trying to find some information and they have to read through 15 pages of off topic bull. If you want to talk about someting that is not in-line with the OP, START A NEW THREAD!!

 

[Guest]

The treads that get chopped up are not typically people "looking for information."

They tend to be statements about the politics of this business that people want to make free of crticism; often posed as a question only to like-minded people.

We know the diffrence between asking: "what computer to buy" and getting back "forget it SC will just sue you for using one"
vs.
satetments that have an obvious reactive polarity, but are poised to be a one-sided treatment of the issue.

 

[Dan Hutter]

The treads that get chopped up are not typically people "looking for information."

They tend to be statements about the politics of this business that people want to make free of crticism; often posed as a question only to like-minded people.

We know the diffrence between asking: "what computer to buy" and getting back "forget it SC will just sue you for using one"
vs.
satetments that have an obvious reactive polarity, but are poised to be a one-sided treatment of the issue.

It's not the issue at all. You want to talk piracy and how 'evil' Karaoke manus are? Or how they're the greatest thing since sliced bread? Go ahead talk to your blue in the face. Keep it on those threads through. I'd venture to say 80+% of our threads circle back to the pro/anti piracy crap fests. I'm sincerely doubting whether anyone actually reads them or just cherry picks points to counter not because of the point but because of who made it.

That being said it feels like I'm paying for hosting and tying up a vBulletin license so that ~ 10 people can kick each other around on a regular basis. Seems like both a waste of time and money.

The sad thing is for people that claim to be fighting the good fight for their industry, they sure waste a whole lot of time rehashing the same points with the same people over and over again. That time could be spent actually doing something for the industry instead of fighting on the internet.

I'm going to get raked over the coals for this but: Fighting on the internet is like winning the special Olympics. Even if you win you're still retarded.

 

[JoeChartreuse]

It's not the issue at all. You want to talk piracy and how 'evil' Karaoke manus are? Or how they're the greatest thing since sliced bread? Go ahead talk to your blue in the face. Keep it on those threads through. I'd venture to say 80+% of our threads circle back to the pro/anti piracy crap fests. I'm sincerely doubting whether anyone actually reads them or just cherry picks points to counter not because of the point but because of who made it.

That being said it feels like I'm paying for hosting and tying up a vBulletin license so that ~ 10 people can kick each other around on a regular basis. Seems like both a waste of time and money.

The sad thing is for people that claim to be fighting the good fight for their industry, they sure waste a whole lot of time rehashing the same points with the same people over and over again. That time could be spent actually doing something for the industry instead of fighting on the internet.

I'm going to get raked over the coals for this but: Fighting on the internet is like winning the special Olympics. Even if you win you're still retarded.

No rake here, Dan. An internet forum is just that- an internet forum.

 

[Guest]

That being said it feels like I'm paying for hosting and tying up a vBulletin license so that ~ 10 people can kick each other around on a regular basis. Seems like both a waste of time and money.

You are, IMHO. I've posted previously that this board belongs back where it was at ODJT. "The Industry" is not so compartmentalized as your vBulletin boards (or certain KJs) would suggest. The very same piracy issues are as relevant to DJs as they are to KJs.

I'm going to get raked over the coals for this but: Fighting on the internet is like winning the special Olympics. Even if you win you're still retarded.

If you want to call members of OKJT retarded then do it without bringing in your personal issues with the Special Olympics - an organization that is anything but retarded. Winning a medal at the Special Olympics ia an actual achievement - uploading Vbulletin sites and postingto them is simply an elective chore.

 

[Dan Hutter]

I knew I'd hear it for 'picking on' the special Olympics. It's just a funny saying I've heard a few times online. I've got nothing against the special Olympics.

I'd never fold this back into ODJT. A big part of the reason for moving it to a separate site was to keep all the flaming, trolling, and baiting off there. If I folded back in I'd be right back at square one.