Who owns a thread and diversions

I think this about digressions rather than diversions and I don't think GNHQ has any guidelines and policies about them. There is a policy about threads specifically about other threads, including – possibly even particularly – a thread that has been deleted by GNHQ. It has always been the case that any Gransnetter may post on any thread and can say just about anything he/she likes, however irrelevant to the OP as long as the post is not personally offensive, advertising or breaks other guidelines. Over the years many a thread has gone off at a tangent almost immediately; there is no rule about how long the postings should stick to the point. As well as accepting deviation, posts may also be repetitive and the site is not moderated by Nicholas Parsons.

So if no one owns a thread except the owners of the site, then

there is no time span for diversions either?

So the poster last night on the legal and money thread has to just accept it?

I suppose it comes down to reasonableness about the time span.

soontobe you say that you had an email from GNHQ (some time ago) who were not happy with you for diverting threads. If I remember rightly, you did at first divert every thread you posted on to evangelise and moralise. That was interpreted by many (including me) as hi-jacking the threads in the direction of your main pre-occupation. I notice that you have eased off on that, and a good thing too.

The political threads are dominated by very strong posts by some posters bending them in the direction of their main pre-occupation, whatever the original subject was of the conversation. That seems to me a kind of high-jacking too.

Diversions are part of all natural conversations. When you stop in the street to chat to a neighbour, you might start off talking about something specific, but you can end up on something entirely different - that is fine. But if the same neighbour insists on turning the conversation to their pet hate and keeps harping on about it (or on only discussing their own feelings about the subject, and not listening to you) you do get a bit fed-up, and end up hurrying past. That is what happens on GN threads when people hog them for a soapbox.

It's just manners, isn't it? Think of it as a conversation around a table, which might well go into diversions or digressions at times but if someone has actually asked a question or sought support, then it's rude to derail that.

On gransnet, let's say someone posts a problem, and someone else comes along - mid-conversation - and says they have a similar problem and goes on to ask about their problem, rather than using their experience to illuminate the OP. People start answering or commenting on that 'new' problem, and the OP's concerns get lost or confused in the subsequent discussion.

That's bad manners. The 'similar problem' poster should have started a new thread.

In the same way, a poster who uses a thread to snipe at another poster or bring a personal grievance, is being rude.

Conversations are give and take. There are no rules about how long to spend on one topic.
I realise you do like rules, soontobe, but there cannot be rigid rules about every possible human interaction.

I think if someone posted a genuine heartfelt request for help and advice and it got frivolous, we might be concerned. But I don't think that's ever happened, has it? Apart from that, I agree with all the posters who say a thread is like a conversation, things move on. And I've always thought the ban on threads-about-threads was to stop posters continuing a possibly acrimonious discussion? Actually, it might be rather nice in the cut and thrust of noisy family debate to be able to say, 'This is my topic, I own it and no one is to derail it till I've had my say'.

They did not say that they were not happy with me Elegran.

I got diverted. I didnt divert. Big difference.

I dont think that anyone hijacks.

Lilygran, it happened yesterday.

I agree with Anya

I don't agree with complaining about wandering off the OP as it is so easy to politely bring it back.

I do sometimes notice a deliberate hijacking (which I think is rather childish) but we all get used to that and can bring it back to the OP if we choose.

I don't mind if someone admits to going off post simply because the OP reminds them of something.

elena. Bearing in mind what you have just posted, there are currently posters on the politics thread, who are complaining about others' postings.

Are they right or are they wrong in your opinion?

I do like rules Elegran!

I am getting all confused.

Can we have a banging the head against wall emoticon?

It is no good strutting and fretting about what is on these threads. It is all sound and fury signifying nothing. (I left out the bit I thought people might think rude.)

" Much Ado About Nothing"??

Having now managed to find their email, and as I dont like things to stand that are incorrect, gransnet a few months ago were not happy with me in their email.

[I havent had any more unhappy emails since, so all well and good].

No one owns a thread and there's nothing wrong with meandering; it's what happens in 'real' conversations [especially when women are talking; men tend to stick to the core subject]. But I do think it's important that people only join in on the conversation if they are genuinely interested in the subject, even if that means they argue vehemently against it.

grin was to absent

Yes you are right Stansgran.

But now at least it is easy to say on a thread that no one owns a thread except for the owners, and diversions are par for the course.

Tegan getting my man on the subject would be a good thing! He goes off at all sorts of tangents so I cannot agree with you.

That's that settled then!

Nonnie; I take it he isn't an engineer then...

Sorry, soontobe, I haven't seen the politics thread(s) where people are complaining about another person's postings.

I think that can be part of the cut-and-thrust of conversation, sometimes.

Would it be rude in real life? If so, it's prob rude online....though I think it's expected that things can be more robust online

No worries. I think that thread is a definite case of posters trying to own it.

Sometimes people just want to chat about a subject that's important to them. Some threads are like conversations with people we've met up with for a coffee and a catchup on what's been happening, whereas others are like someone inviting like minded people around to discuss something that's important to them and they want to throw ideas around. Which doesn't mean that other people are excluded, because forums don't work like that, but they aren't being rude by wanting to concentrate on the main topic. That's my take on it, anyway.

I have started threads and I must say I would be sadly disappointed if someone didn't take the discussion from the starting point and into other areas. I am old enough to realise that it is the little meanders and by-ways that are much more interesting than the main highways and motorways, in discussions, and in life. But I do get a bit fed up of people who just post the same point using different words- if you've made a point be satisfied and let the discussion move on.

I'm a member of another forum where posters are expected to stick to the topic, mainly, and mods will remind people to do that and even delete posts if things get out of hand.
As I was used to that, I was a bit surprised, to begin with, by the meanderings on Gransnet.
I have got used to them now and think Elena's description of a conversation round a table is how it should be.