Moderators need to review rule B11

[GommeInc]

B11. Do not make pointless posts - It is not allowed to post any messages that others consider to be meaningless or pointless or not relevant to the discussion.

I am seeing alot of pointless edits in peoples replies lately, which are relevant to the discussion and related to a sub-topic in a discussion. I think whoever the Moderator Manager is needs to remind them that any posts related to a post in a discussion isn't pointless. Here is an example in the accents discussion thread:

lmao.. hes from bridgend.
thats suicide town
DONT DO ANYTHING STUPID!!
Insert Pointless Post remark - Moderator

This was quoted from a previous poster:

I like the american accent, and the welsh :]

Yay for the welsh, Erm I love my accent but if it wasnt welsh it would be Polish, Because it makes me laugh

It relates to a discussion in a thread.

I can see the excuse being chucked at me such as:

"He went off topic talking about something else blah blah, he should make a new thread blah blah," making a new thread on that would be pointless. And as stated it relates to something in the thread, which isn't against the rules, and if it was, you'll get very boring discussions in threads where no one can go slightly off the central discussion. Besides, you seem to fear that when one person goes off topic, everyone afterwards will. Looking over the forum, a majority of people reply to posts in the first page including the main post that started the discussion, so there is no fear of there being a majority of pointless posts.

If you're forcing moderators to make logs, then you're managing skills are terrible. Quality over quantity, who cares how many edits a Mod makes, they're looked at as smarter people if the quality of their moderator is the best aspect of them

If you want people to stay on topic 100%, change the rules or direct them to the debates forum/trading forums.

[e5]

I see what you mean but the quotes you posted, were they edited?

[GommeInc]

Ah, best add that now before it's too late. The top one was

[mat64]

I think this rule is applied too harshly in some areas, I've always thought pointless posting to be something along these lines "A post which has no relevence to a the topic or a previous post in the topic". Also, since when did off-topic posts get edited? I've seen a fair few moderators editing them but from what I can remember that's not the case.

[GommeInc]

I think this rule is applied too harshly in some areas, I've always thought pointless posting to be something along these lines "A post which has no relevence to a the topic or a previous post in the topic". Also, since when did off-topic posts get edited? I've seen a fair few moderators editing them but from what I can remember that's not the case.

Indeed, the rule isn't harsh, but for some reason some members of the moderator team make it strict. There is no problem going slightly off topic, as long as it refers to another persons post or strikes an interesting fact that relates to something else and to the thread, like the member who I quoted (I left it blank, incase I get moaned at ). To go off topic, you literally have to go completely off topic. Like when someone is asking for detailed opinions on an Airbus and another member randomly says "I like cheese," which is pointless.

An exception is for the trade forums and the debate forum, where you have to keep on topic, but even then you can go off topic to some degree like "Gordon Brown is raking in this much from petrol" can be related to another countries attitude to petrol, even though Gordon Brown is the topic.

[Mr.Sam]

I agree, posts which have some connection to the thread should be left - posts that are something like "Hi Sam" or do not connect somehow with the current discussion should be edited, they shouldn't edit threads which are a tangent of current discussion - this will allow topics to flow better eg:


topic about farming
vv
livestock diseases like foot and mouth
vv
discussion about people spreading diseases
vv
human diseases
vv
NHS

I understand that is a poor example but it shows you the topic progressing.

[GommeInc]

I agree, posts which have some connection to the thread should be left - posts that are something like "Hi Sam" or do not connect somehow with the current discussion should be edited, they shouldn't edit threads which are a tangent of current discussion - this will allow topics to flow better eg:


topic about farming
vv
livestock diseases like foot and mouth
vv
discussion about people spreading diseases
vv
human diseases
vv
NHS

I understand that is a poor example but it shows you the topic progressing.

Don't be silly, that's a good example NHS is completely irrelevant to farming, yet it is relevant if you understand the topic and how it has progressed.

[Callum.]

Yeah I've noticed this alot, but never got around to saying something about it. You see someone say something a bit off the subject, and then someone will comment about that aswell, which means it isn't pointless. Moderators should read the actualy thread.

[Mr.Sam]

No I was meaning that it would not represent a typical thread on this forum, how many times have you seen a good discussion about farming and the NHS?

Don't be silly, that's a good example NHS is completely irrelevant to farming, yet it is relevant if you understand the topic and how it has progressed.

[GommeInc]

Indeed, that's the only excuse they can really come up with. Although if it is a long thread then I can't blame them for not wanting to read it But they should take the time to read back a few pages to find out where this discussion has developed. It's like some discussions get worn thin and the central discussion has little to no meaning. Surely it should be suggested they make a new thread on the new discussion, than to have the warning: "Closed, gone off topic" at the bottom of it.

No I was meaning that it would not represent a typical thread on this forum, how many times have you seen a good discussion about farming and the NHS?

The principle is there