Tangents on WC2

[paradox3]

The issue of tangents in conversation here on WC2 has come up a few times recently.

First of all, I note the difficulty in actually defining a tangent. To some extent, they are like beauty . . . in the eye of the beholder. Do tangents occur when we get away from the topic in the opening post? Or do they occur when we stray from the conversation which is unfolding?

How much responsibility does the topic starter have for the life of the thread which follows? Some of our members stay closely involved with the threads they start and make a valiant effort to keep the discussion on track. Others are happy with a more free ranging conversation.

Do we feel any differently about tangents if the topic starter has disappeared?

At times I have considered the moderators to be overly involved in calling tangents and moving posts to new threads. On other occasions I have appreciated their actions.

In the opening post on my recent bible study thread, I said I was not totally opposed to tangents. However, I commented, discussion is often better served by starting a new thread for each new or related topic.

What do you think?

 

[Luce NDs]

Shall we stick to one way? ... or branch out like the independant "I" sometimes appearing as "J" ... the development of Tao on the way through! You did know that Taoism was considered the religion of "word" in some dark past time?

Is this something to be understood with great extension ...? Did Jesus appear and a wanderer ... as mnemonic? Tis a phenomenal underwriter ... alternately I'Z us ... blind!

 

[Pinga]

I like a bit of an exploration, but, if two people start diving into a topic say back & forth 5 times, then, I tend to walk away from the thread.

It is like in a group, if two people just talk back & forth, off topic or trending off.
If I am the host in real life, I will try to draw others in, or shift the conversation back.
If many are engaged, I might say "is this something that we can come back to"?
If the study part is done, ie the end of the session, then, whatever happens, happens.

 

[Jae]

Personally, I dislike tangents. I think of them as derailing threads. I avoid making them myself, and prefer that people avoid making them on the threads which I begin.

 

[paradox3]

Personally, I dislike tangents. I think of them as derailing threads. I avoid making them myself, and prefer that people avoid making them on the threads which I begin.

There's an interesting point. What is the difference between a tangent and a derailment? Do tangents evolve into derailments?

 

[Jae]

There's an interesting point. What is the difference between a tangent and a derailment? Do tangents evolve into derailments?

My perception is - people tend to call off-topic comments that they like "tangents," those that they don't like "derailments."

 

[Luce NDs]

There's an interesting point. What is the difference between a tangent and a derailment? Do tangents evolve into derailments?

Train wreck in the railroading to heaven? Some petulantly would call this 'hang 'n Hei ...

Western chaos ... about not wishing the confined to have greater visions about the brutality of humanity ... the denial of that psyche to behind the tapestry ... out of here?

Then a great mass of folks say neurological stuff isn't real ... so stimulation rests! Altruism?
Stumps ...

 

[paradox3]

My perception is - people tend to call off-topic comments that they like "tangents," those that they don't like "derailments."

I always think of derailments as total train wrecks. Threads can get back on track (to use another train metaphor) after a couple of tangents but not after a derailment.

But I like your point about the subjectivity involved in calling these things.

 

[paradox3]

Train wreck in the railroading to heaven? Some petulantly would call this 'hang 'n Hei ...

Western chaos ...

Says the master of the tangent in communication around here.

 

[Luce NDs]

Says the master of the tangent in communication around here.

So do you suggest I've a' broad-spread psyche? Do you's oad that tom mie ... as meme-non ... a moo's ... like Jeannie Moos on CNN this morning conversing on Moos and other buffalo 'n events down there ... thus Moo'n in ... as David in the night ... booty of aspirations? MLK said he had one ... he'd observed the hump ...

 

[paradox3]

So do you suggest I've a' broad-spread psyche? Do you's oad that tom mie ... as meme-non ... a moo's ... like Jeannie Moos on CNN this morning conversing on Moos and other buffalo 'n events down there ... thus Moo'n in ... as David in the night ... booty of aspirations? MLK said he had one ... he'd observed the hump ...

No, I suggest that I understand so little of your posts it is hard to tell if they are technically tangents or not. I am sorry to say this but I find such posts disruptive on my threads.

 

[Luce NDs]

No, I suggest that I understand so little of your posts it is hard to tell if they are technically tangents or not. I am sorry to say this but I find such posts disruptive on my threads.

Good confinement ... what's more out there is thus imaginary ... abstract! Thus abstractly the absolute is lost ... to that far side consideration of process ... eternally out?

Will such cognizance return? Protect the children from the eternal ... God fear?

 

[Mendalla]

In general discussion threads, some drift is to be expected and should be accepted. That is how conversations work. I am cool with it as long as things stay civil and somehow one can walk back along the tangent to the original topic. If the OP wants a given thread to stay focused, they should say that and guide things along with pointed questions designed to steer things back on course. Mod action to deal with tangents should be rare and focused on situations where the derailment is becoming a source of conflict or is so far off the rails that the line no longer follows back.

In something like a book study, there needs to be less tolerance of drift given that there is a fairly specific goal. Hence the discussions about tighter moderation in such threads.

 

[Luce NDs]

Strings are not to be great fabrications as in the most extensive of myths ... yet an enigma to the well confined!

This does go against string theory and M concerns! The millenia factor on fullness sometimes considered to be like a thousand nights ... Solomon's Nightmare? Then that flash ... get out whilst you can ...

Thus the myth goes on ... has its own doings ... sometimes referred to as psych*IC ...

 

[paradox3]

In something like a book study, there needs to be less tolerance of drift given that there is a fairly specific goal. Hence the discussions about tighter moderation in such threads.

Okey dokey. If this will apply to Bible study threads I am most pleased.

Agreed that designing one's OP carefully is a good idea. We can let people know if we want to encourage new threads for related subjects and so on.

 

[Mendalla]

Okey dokey. If this will apply to Bible study threads I am most pleased.

Of course. I said "book study" and the Bible is, last I checked, a book. Other guided, curated topics (e.g. a study based on a TV series or movie) could work, too.

The key, for me but can't speak for the rest of Council, would be that it should likely be a bit more formal than "hey, let's read/watch x". Your approach in the Mark thread would fit, to be sure, since you are guiding the reading and providing thoughts and questions to consider.

 

[Jae]

Of course. I said "book study" and the Bible is, last I checked, a book. Other guided, curated topics (e.g. a study based on a TV series or movie) could work, too.

The key, for me but can't speak for the rest of Council, would be that it should likely be a bit more formal than "hey, let's read/watch x". Your approach in the Mark thread would fit, to be sure, since you are guiding the reading and providing thoughts and questions to consider.

The Bible isn't a book. It's a collection of books - a library.

 

[paradox3]

Many books in one (or One) you might say.

 

[Jae]

Many books in one. Or in One you might say.

The many books are most often sold bound together.

 

[paradox3]

Agreed that the Bible qualifies as a book. For WC2 purposes.