DeRailing / Topic Discussion

[MRCboicgy]

Originally Posted by Locke

Well now you're just dividing by zero.

Take this to the math megathread or the education subforum please.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by MRCboicgy

I think some more thought into thread titles could help too


I tend to personally avoid most megathreads, for casual reading - unless someone reports a post in one - because i will often feel out of the loop with discussion. It ends up being like missing an episode in a tv series.


Here's one thing that leads to my confusion: Last night, should we talk about the Oilers game in progress in the OOT thread or the Sucks thread?

I would vote for the OOT, then any other commentary around the team can be in the other thread.

Example, talk about Nurse scoring the OT goal without #97 in the OOT thread, and then talk about the bewilderment at how #97 has been in on 9/10 goals in the Sucks thread.

The Game Takes versus PGT suffers from this a bit. I often end up making the same point in both but it feels a bit like making spam posts. I sometimes think Bingo might put his game takes into the PGT like the ATL. Strictly speaking I guess, the Game Takes thread should be just to talk about the article.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by MRCboicgy

Take this to the math megathread or the education subforum please.

Yes sir.

[GranteedEV]

The problem with more threads is that you may end up skipping ones with weak titles, even if the content is interesting. I don't love megathreads but at least I know the topic pretty clearly.

But yea, can we please have player discussion threads go back to "Sam Freakin' Bennett" title format? I find it so cringey to see its current title.

[Tron_fdc]

Any opportunity to belittle the oilers should e given a free pass IMO. Post it wherever you want.

[pepper24]

Sam Bennett is so polarizing to Flames fans that we now have a 4+ page thread debating whether we should include everything about him into one mega thread or separate threads lol.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

It's rather absurd to say that you didn't want to take a thread in a certain direction after taking a thread in that direction, don't you think? That's the issue I have here: you basically said "this is my opinion, and now further discussion on it is off topic and it is not respectful to respond to it". That doesn't sit well with me. But if your reasoning was more benign than I took it, fair enough. I apologize.

I think my point about disrespectful was misunderstood or poorly communicated on my part. What I was trying to say in that thread was that I feel it is not great to argue the same position in multiple threads. So it was about me trying not to do that, not about people replying to me.
I wanted to make the original point, to reinforce that my views on this are consistent even when it is a Flame dishing out the hit. But I also imagined that people could be exhausted by that debate happening across multiple threads.

[iggypop]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I think this vote is showing we don't need to change subject titles as much as allow more topics.

Bennett and his play this year
Trade Sam Bennett
Who Should Bennett Play With
Bennett injures Compheer

could all be different topics.

It's a tough call.

I would guess these four topics (at least the first three) would eventually evolve into the same discussion regardless of thread title.
Bennett's play this year relates to poster's opinion on trading him as well as who he should play with.

I'd say the forum is running great as-is.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

You absolutely have been respectful and thoughtful in making your points and it's a topic I personally enjoy debating.

I do think though that making a point and then pronouncing you will not respond to any replies on the topic isn't maybe the best choice. I understand not wanting to derail, but once you make the comment you've let that genie out of the bottle. Telling people not to respond to you kind of shuts down the debate and unilaterally gives you the last word.

As for more or less thread topics, I really have no preference. I have always thought it's a self regulating thing as some topics just wither and die on their own.

Didn't really mean to tell people not to reply, just that I wouldn't continue the debate in a thread that wasn't focused on it. People are welcome to reply all they want and if there is true appetite to continue it in the Sam thread then I'm game. I didn't say though people couldn't reply. I just said I wouldn't offer further comment in that specific thread.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Didn't really mean to tell people not to reply, just that I wouldn't continue the debate in a thread that wasn't focused on it. People are welcome to reply all they want and if there is true appetite to continue it in the Sam thread then I'm game. I didn't say though people couldn't reply. I just said I wouldn't offer further comment in that specific thread.

Yeah you’re correct. You didn’t tell people what to do. Just that you wouldn’t respond or engage in debate in that thread. It wasn’t rude or anything.

[Hey Connor, It's Mess]

I don't think I can live in a world where a thread can't be turned into a Jankowski discussion.

[puckedoff]

Originally Posted by iggypop

It's a tough call.

I would guess these four topics (at least the first three) would eventually evolve into the same discussion regardless of thread title.
Bennett's play this year relates to poster's opinion on trading him as well as who he should play with.

I'd say the forum is running great as-is.

This is my thought on it as well. Each of those sub-threads is going to get derailed, so you end up being no better off than you were before.

The worst is forums where half of the posts are "this should be in X forum" or "use the search feature" where people are more concerned with policing the rules than having any sort of debate.

[sempuki]

The only acceptable outcome is for this thread to become a mega thread.

[Bingo]

It's been running 90% since I put the poll up ... more topics less mega threads

[H2SO4(aq)]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Didn't really mean to tell people not to reply, just that I wouldn't continue the debate in a thread that wasn't focused on it. People are welcome to reply all they want and if there is true appetite to continue it in the Sam thread then I'm game. I didn't say though people couldn't reply. I just said I wouldn't offer further comment in that specific thread.

Then link (in your post) people to a thread where they can have that argument. Don’t just make your comment, slam the gavel, and run away.

[Coach]

One thing I’d like to see too is maybe more mega thread title updates. For example, that arena discussion thread was bumped and discussion continued after new renders of plans were released. It would have been nice if the title reflected an important update like that that may draw attention to the old thread va opening up a new one.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by H2SO4(aq)

Then link (in your post) people to a thread where they can have that argument. Don’t just make your comment, slam the gavel, and run away.

Jeepers OK.
Frick part of the problem is how people choose to talk to each other on this site. I've tried to explain what I was intending in a very calm manner and you continue to fire back in a hostile way.
In short...why u hef to be mad?

I didn't slam the gavel or runaway
Calm down crabby pants.

[SebC]

Fata! https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=126140

(No, my opinion from four years ago has not changed.)

[Jiri Hrdina]

^Is that the thread to talk about Sam Bennett or Mark Jankowski. I can't tell.

[H2SO4(aq)]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Jeepers OK.
Frick part of the problem is how people choose to talk to each other on this site. I've tried to explain what I was intending in a very calm manner and you continue to fire back in a hostile way.
In short...why u hef to be mad?

I didn't slam the gavel or runaway
Calm down crabby pants.

I demand an apology. My pants are not crabby.