Who owns a thread and diversions

I have a box full of chocolate cakes that I need to take to my DD - oh whoops! - a diversion

I don't think the question of anyone 'owning' a topic comes up very often at all!

Yes, there are sometimes complaints about 'derailment' and 'hi-jacking' of threads, but we do have to accept that threads can wander, as is so often said!

x post

True.

But the mention of diversions comes up quite a lot, as does, who owns a topic.

I got told off quite forcefully for digressing slightly by an OP who I have to say didn't stay on GN for very long. I drew my own conclusions from that.

Maybe a bit early to assume there is no consensus, you started this thread at 1/4 to 9 and came to your conclusion at 9.01!
I think most people so far agree, but maybe it is too soontosay, soontobe(see what I did there? )

I agree with that too Leticia.

To my mind, on a site as small as this, it is quite easy to get it back to the op again.

Personally I dont think I see a problem.

Yes Alea. That is 1 of the reasons I started the thread.

She didnt come back for a day, and then it had gone jokey.
And when she did come back about 5 days later, she said she wasnt going to reply again as her thread had gone haywire.

How long should we wait for posters to come back before the diversions?
1 day? 5 days?

It is a bit like a conversation- it moves on.
If you read the whole thread you can often see the connection but if you read the start and the end you might be baffled.
You can always try and get it back.

ninathenana

I actually do think that there is not much of a consensus.

I think more are in favour of diversions than not.

And more are in favour of someone does not own a thread.

But I am not sure.

And often some quieter posters can be in the minority camp, which may actually be the majority.

As I said yesterday on the Baby Boomers and booze thread,
Nobody "owns" the contents of a thread they start, although it can be frustrating if it is derailed especially early on

Yes, it can be annoying if a thread started in good faith goes off at a tangent, but unless this is done deliberately to "high jack" a subject that's how discussions and conversations develop. If someone is being deliberately contentious or obstructive I suppose GNHQ might step in but otherwise you have reached the correct conclusion in your final 2 lines.

Mind you, I think the poster with the antisocial neighbour felt miffed at how that thread went,(!) but to reiterate
nobody owns a thread

I agree ninathenana.
But threads about threads seem to be a definite no no.

I think it is polite to stay near to the opening post.

By the time I'd typed this I see others had posted the opposite opinion.
That's what it's all about

They did to me Ana as part of an email, a few months after I joined.

Just my opinion.....
No the op doesn't own the thread but I consider it bad manners to "high jack" a thread and make it all about you and your situation. Also If someone wants to deviate quiet a bit from the topic then they should start their own thread.

Lona

I think it's a bit like the difference between a conversation and a lecture. In the latter, a speaker gives their talk, usually without interruption, and may invite questions at the end. A conversation between a group of people may well be started by one of them, but will often divert, twist turn and generally sort of "develop" as more ideas & opinions (or even personal anecdotes) are thrown into the mix.

GNHQ has never said anything about diversions!

But GNHQ didnt used to like diversions.

And some posters complain about diversions, while others say it doesnt matter[myself included].

When I joined it never occurred to me that someone might 'own' something, I thought it was an open discussion group, where we could throw a thought or two in the pot and see what transpired. Conversation is what it all about I think, and we can often start with one thing and end up with an entirely different topic, interesting. The odd snipe is sometimes unnecessary, but again part and parcel of a diverse group of people with views to express.

By George, I think she's got it!