Teemu Likonen wrote: > On 2009-06-10 09:51 (-0400), Charles Campbell wrote: > > >> I just thought I'd inquire as to others' thoughts on this netiquette >> topic: highjacking a thread for a totally unrelated subject. My own >> tendency is not to reply to such highjacked threads; should I/we start >> asking that a new thread be started on the subject instead of giving >> substantive replies? As a recent example of this, consider Carsten >> Agger's "Hide cursor" which hijacked the "is the [Esc] key not very >> unreachable?" thread. >> > > Perhaps you could start by elaborating the semantics of hijacking in > this mailing list's context. What makes a change in the subject of > discussion (and Subject header) hijacking? > > I think it's perfectly normal that during a discussion the subject > wanders from one to another. New interesting points are raised by the > participants. It's not necessarily because of a rude person wanting more > attention. Everyone is still free to continue with the original > subjects. Separate subjects are still technically separate subthreads. > > But if vim-use list is seen only or mostly as a question-answer mailing > list, rather than a discussion list, then perhaps I can understand that > changing the subject of a question-answer thread may feel like an > unhelpful practice. Haven't seen such "changing the subject means > hijacking and is rude" view anywhere else, though. > As Tim Chase implied, some folks may not even see the new topic on a hijacked thread, so it is unwise to hijack a thread from an originator's viewpoint (assuming s/he wants a wide audience). As Carsten Agger pointed out, it wasn't his intention to hijack a thread -- I am not saying that hijacking a thread is rude so much as unwise for the new topic's author and misleading to those readers expecting more on the (original) thread.
As far as wandering discussions go, changing the subject to reflect the morphing topic seems appropriate to me, although, again, one is limiting the audience for that subthread and so there's a judgment call involved. That is different from starting a brand new, unrelated topic; which also addresses your second sentence's question. So, an unrelated topic, no semantics in transition, no acknowledgement of the original thread's subject == hijacked thread. Regards, Chip Campbell --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
