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.

:confused:

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

So, how 'bout them Red Sox? :)

Nice definition, though.

I wonder what country Bush is going to illegally invade to prevent Thread Hi-jacking ?


floppy

So there is only one way to do something?:scratch:
Yeh, that sounds like the OS way.

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?

Anybody can tell me how to get 3d acceleration going on my NES???

:D:D:D but wouldn't that be called a "thread lowjack" ???

regards

John

So how you go about legal invasions, exactly?

Perhaps if we put the lawyers in front of the tanks.. :p

hmmmm


----------------

Load up a virtual NES machine, utilize opengl as the renderer.

Only trying to get my 2000 posts full ;)

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.

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.

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.

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.

You know what completely irrelevant policy we need clarification on? Top-posting!!!

;)

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).