| General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun! |
| Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
 |
GNU/Linux Basic Guide
This 255-page guide will provide you with the keys to understand the philosophy of free software, teach you how to use and handle it, and give you the tools required to move easily in the world of GNU/Linux. Many users and administrators will be taking their first steps with this GNU/Linux Basic guide and it will show you how to approach and solve the problems you encounter.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free. |
|
 |
|
10-07-2006, 04:54 AM
|
#1
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: USA and Italy
Distribution: Debian Testing; OpenSuSE 12.1; Fedora 17
Posts: 1,541
Rep: 
|
Thread hijacking
Thread hijacking is when you post a reply to a thread that does not pertain to the original post. This practice is frowned upon. If a person has a similar problem as the OP, they should start a new thread, not use someone else's to ask a new question. Also, do not post a running history of a problem that has nothing to do with the OP. For instance, if an OP is about a certain command, and you found a way to do something that doesn't use that command at all, but accomplishes the same result, it is better placed somewhere besides that thread.
|
|
|
|
10-07-2006, 12:58 PM
|
#2
|
|
Guru
Registered: Mar 2002
Location: Salt Lake City, UT - USA
Distribution: Gentoo ; LFS ; Kubuntu
Posts: 12,611
Rep:
|
I'll move this on over to General. I'm not sure where you were going with this, but if it's a series of your definitions of forum related terms, maybe a wiki entry would be more appropriate?
Cool
|
|
|
|
10-07-2006, 01:32 PM
|
#3
|
|
Member
Registered: Jun 2006
Distribution: Slackware 10.2, Debian Testing/Unstable, Ubuntu Breezy Badger, working on LFS
Posts: 228
Rep:
|
So, how 'bout them Red Sox?
Nice definition, though.
|
|
|
|
10-07-2006, 07:24 PM
|
#4
|
|
Member
Registered: Aug 2004
Location: Albany, Western Australia
Distribution: Mageia 2, SME Server 8
Posts: 610
Rep:
|
I wonder what country Bush is going to illegally invade to prevent Thread Hi-jacking ?
floppy
|
|
|
|
10-07-2006, 08:05 PM
|
#5
|
|
Member
Registered: May 2003
Location: S.W. Ohio
Distribution: Ubuntu, OS X
Posts: 760
Rep:
|
Quote:
|
For instance, if an OP is about a certain command, and you found a way to do something that doesn't use that command at all, but accomplishes the same result, it is better placed somewhere besides that thread.
|
So there is only one way to do something?
Yeh, that sounds like the OS way.
|
|
|
|
10-08-2006, 01:19 PM
|
#6
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Edmonton AB, Canada
Distribution: Gentoo x86; Gentoo PPC; Gentoo Sparc64; FreeBSD; OS X; Solaris
Posts: 3,731
Rep:
|
Quote:
|
For instance, if an OP is about a certain command, and you found a way to do something that doesn't use that command at all, but accomplishes the same result, it is better placed somewhere besides that thread.
|
I don't agree with that at all. I don't think twilli227 does either. What's wrong with showing the OP a better/different way of doing something?
|
|
|
|
10-08-2006, 02:14 PM
|
#7
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: Feb 2002
Distribution: t2 - trying to anyway
Posts: 2,541
Rep:
|
Anybody can tell me how to get 3d acceleration going on my NES???
|
|
|
|
10-08-2006, 02:52 PM
|
#8
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: Jun 2002
Location: UK - South Coast.
Distribution: Ubuntu (usually the latest....)
Posts: 2,672
Rep:
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by crashmeister
Anybody can tell me how to get 3d acceleration going on my NES???
|
   but wouldn't that be called a "thread lowjack" ???
regards
John
|
|
|
|
10-09-2006, 12:52 AM
|
#9
|
|
Member
Registered: Aug 2005
Distribution: Smoothwall
Posts: 283
Rep:
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by floppywhopper
I wonder what country Bush is going to illegally invade to prevent Thread Hi-jacking ?
|
So how you go about legal invasions, exactly?
Perhaps if we put the lawyers in front of the tanks..
hmmmm
----------------
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by crashmeister
Anybody can tell me how to get 3d acceleration going on my NES???
|
Load up a virtual NES machine, utilize opengl as the renderer.
|
|
|
|
10-09-2006, 05:16 AM
|
#10
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: Feb 2002
Distribution: t2 - trying to anyway
Posts: 2,541
Rep:
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigjohn
   but wouldn't that be called a "thread lowjack" ???
regards
John
|
Only trying to get my 2000 posts full 
|
|
|
|
10-09-2006, 05:33 AM
|
#11
|
|
Moderator
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 24,779
|
Any community has their own set of unwritten rules. For both written and unwritten rules goes they are not made and upheld by a single individual but by the community. So understand this C.F.B.. Conjuring up definitions that intersect with management of LQ and laying down the law is better left to those who have the impartiality of judgment and are appointed to enforce it.
* We do welcome discussions about definitions if there's anything that benefits from modification, additions or clarity. In that case you should take it up with the moderators or the site owner.
Yours is not a discussion. You're not asking questions: you're making statements.
Thread hijacking is when you post a reply to a thread that does not pertain to the original post.
Thread hijacking is a deliberate and persistent attempt to lead a thread down a certain path. Note there is a difference between OT posting and hijacking. Since other boards allow their members to do so a lot of people new to LQ have to get used to not tacking on their own (OT) questions. If you see it happen report it and try to nudge them in the right direction.
If a person has a similar problem as the OP, they should start a new thread, not use someone else's to ask a new question.
True. The reason however is not thread hijacking but the fact we want everybody to have a fair chance at solving their problems. Tacking on to existing threads just does not guarantee the best possible exposure. Again, if you see it happen report it and try to nudge them in the right direction, don't try to police it yourself.
For instance, if an OP is about a certain command, and you found a way to do something that doesn't use that command at all, but accomplishes the same result, it is better placed somewhere besides that thread.
Wrong. Some people do not know different ways to accomplish a task. Showing them an alternative may entice people to learn more, foster discussion and is a way to share knowledge within the community.
|
|
|
|
10-09-2006, 11:24 PM
|
#12
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,142
Rep: 
|
I agree with unSpawn. Thread hijacking is a deliberate trolling attempt by a single member. Going generally off-topic as a natural progression on a debate is very common on forums and you cannot avoid it or wish it away.
|
|
|
|
10-10-2006, 06:29 PM
|
#13
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: USA and Italy
Distribution: Debian Testing; OpenSuSE 12.1; Fedora 17
Posts: 1,541
Original Poster
Rep: 
|
I made this post specifically to link to a reply I made in a different post. I'm not trying to lay down law for LQ. The last thing I want to do is start making rules that hinder the usefullness of the board. Please accept my apology for arousing such a, well, unexpected response to my OP. The definition I used for the well known term 'thread hijacking' is pretty standard across the board for all types of online forums. I didn't make up the term myself. I believe if anyone took the time to really think about what my OP says, instead of thinking about themselves, or me; they would realize what I say is a good rule and adopt it.
Last edited by AwesomeMachine; 10-10-2006 at 06:32 PM.
|
|
|
|
10-10-2006, 06:48 PM
|
#14
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: Jan 2004
Location: Roughly 29.467N / 81.206W
Distribution: Ubuntu, FreeBSD, NetBSD
Posts: 1,449
Rep:
|
I frequent several online forums (this one included, as well as other technical ones and some non-technical ones) where your "across the board" definition would be innaccurate. Almost all of them are more concerned with posts that are beneficial to the discussion or finding a solution to the problem and not that they are strictly related to the original post. I would agree that repeated attempts to change the direction of the thread or a radical depature from the original topic would fall under this.
I didn't know that such a response would be unexpected. Since such a strict interpretation of the term was unusual to me. It's probably a matter of worldview.
Quote:
|
but wouldn't that be called a "thread lowjack" ???
|
You know what completely irrelevant policy we need clarification on? Top-posting!!!

|
|
|
|
10-10-2006, 10:49 PM
|
#15
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,142
Rep: 
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AwesomeMachine
I made this post specifically to link to a reply I made in a different post. I'm not trying to lay down law for LQ. The last thing I want to do is start making rules that hinder the usefullness of the board. Please accept my apology for arousing such a, well, unexpected response to my OP. The definition I used for the well known term 'thread hijacking' is pretty standard across the board for all types of online forums. I didn't make up the term myself. I believe if anyone took the time to really think about what my OP says, instead of thinking about themselves, or me; they would realize what I say is a good rule and adopt it.
|
You forget that when you post something like this, it comes across as preachy and stuffy so you're likely to be ignored or flamed.
I'm not saying this because I think that was your intention. I'm sure you had the best intention posting this thread, but I've come across several instances of this kind of thing and on many boards, this might actually be considered as spam because the mods might suspect you of trying to up your post count just copy/pasting stuff from other places. (honest, not joking).
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:29 AM.
|
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|