How do you guys feel about mods splitting posts into new threads?

A thread in P&R about Fox News split off into a very respectful disagreement about gender labels, sexual orientation, and identity. On one hand, it was inspired by something seen on Fox News. But on the other hand, it had nothing to do with Fox News and more to do with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ victory in New York. But, really, it was a fascinating discussion that I felt deserved to be highlighted as its own topic.

The ability to move posts to a new thread is a tool I’ve been reluctant to use, partly because I’d hate for anyone to lose track of a conversation – oh well, I guess the topic scrolled off my screen… – but mostly because I think you guys should be responsible for shaping your own conversations. If things want to derail and people want to talk about something else, that’s totally fine with me. That’s just part of how conversations happen. But the conversation about gender identity was forever trapped under a Fox News topic header. It deserved better. I wouldn’t want anyone to think moving the posts to a new thread is any sort of reprimand. On the contrary, it was an acknowledgement that this is a conversation that deserves to become its own thing, that deserves a way to draw in new participants who couldn’t care less about what Fox News is doing.

So what are your feelings on me, @telefrog, or @stusser splitting posts into a new thread when interesting discussions develop? Not as a way to remind people to stay on topic – which is something I don’t think moderators should have to do – but as a way to sort of help curate interesting discussions. Is it too much interference? Is it part of what moderators should do? Any suggestions about when it is and isn’t appropriate?

-Tom

P.S. And before you jump in here with a Thunderdone reference, @wumpus, I already know your thoughts on the matter. :)

I think if you ask the participants beforehand, and if they’re cool with it, then split it, sure. Don’t just do it willy nilly, that’ll be jarring.

Is it possible to copy posts into a new thread? The mega-threads usually move on, so the redundancy issue might not be too bad?

I think used judiciously it is probably a good thing. In this case I have no problem with it.

Yeah, I think cloning the comments into a new thread with a gentle “please continue this discussion over there” is totally appropriate.

Edit: actually, looking at the Fox News thread now…I don’t feel the lack of those posts at all. So, I think it’s totally cool to move the offending posts if used judiciously.

Sure, as long as the participants are in agreement.

More topics, with direct and clear titles describing what is in those topics, makes them easier to find 👍

I’m in favor of that sort of discussion curation as long as there’s a post in the original thread saying “hey guys, I moved the identity discussion to its own thread; here’s the link.”

This. I’m all for splitting topics where it makes sense, so long as the mod doing so makes some common-sense efforts to let the participants know that the discussion has been moved.

Specifically I’d love a note in the thread being forked with a link to the new thread, and the OP of the new thread to be a quick little “Discussion forked from XYZ” note.

Thanks @tomchick @telefrog @stusser for doing the mod thing!

I have no opinion on this matter, but I just realized we have a @Thrag and a @Thraeg.

image

I’m in favor of it, since we all do the thing we’re we go significantly off topic and it makes the threads pretty shit to follow sometimes if you aren’t happy with the tangent.

For instance, I was informed that you split the thread you mention in the op and I though, yes, good idea, makes sense, even though I was on the “receiving end” of said split.

Edit: Now if someone can split the gifs thread into an “interesting gifs” thread and a “people with too much time on their hands just fucking around increasing noise” thread, I’d be happier. I regularly fall into the latter camp, I’m aware.

I don’t mind splitting, so long as there are signposts in the original location and in the new thread indicating where the heck that new thread came from. Those conversations are rarely in a vacuum and it’s useful to have references to understand the context.

Something I just noticed in the newly split thread which spawned this discussion, the new thread now has all of those posts marked as unread for me. I already read most of them. All of them? Not sure. Maybe? If there’s more than one or two at the bottom of the thread that are new, it’s a PITA to figure out where I left off. i.e., I really, really like the “take me to the first unread post” feature when I click on threads. It’s discordant when I click on a new thread and see a whole bunch of posts I’ve already read.

I don’t really think it’s needed that much. Anyone browsing the threads in P&R and elsewhere usually see the subject matter of a thread wax and wane over time on the topic itself. Nothing wrong with that, it follows natural conversation methods we use in person.

But there are times when a helping hand, or rather, a reminder might be needed. “Hey guys, this talk on the legal aspects between X and Y really should move to a separate thread if you’re going to continue it. If you keep up here, I’ll move it on my own.”

That being said, your house, your rules. And I could see it working fine either way.

We are missing @threg and we’ll have the entire set!

I think the concept is fine, and would add value. I think the key is to have an implementation that is (and appears to be, importantly) solicitous, or it could be misperceived.

This is what I thought it was initially. Now that i know otherwise, I’m fine with it. It was a little jarring, but I can deal with it. Are we expecting the Mod Triad to make that call each time?

I am very happy this capability exists; some situations totally call for it.

Fine with me. Done well it would benefit the derail. Done poorly and it would be disruptive, and off-putting for those who think their posts were on-topic. Done my way and there would be no survivors.

The spirit of what Tom said and the perception of the moves seems… different.

I think, like most things, it’s a good idea in moderation and particularly when it’s splitting something out of the mega-threads so it can have more focused conversation instead of being burried.

I support trying it out and I think it’ll be self evident if it is awful and should be discontinued. We non-moderator split the Star Control game and legal aspects and I think that has helped both conversations.