Etiquette and changing of threads

[lee]

Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> writes:

> first: my intention is *not* to start another epic thread

What is your intention?

> since i am always the unholy prick here after i lose patience

Don't lose patience.  If you don't like someones posts, put the author
into your score file and have their posts scored down (or use whatever
equivalent means your MUA provides you with), or just ignore them.

Queue your posts before sending them.  After reading and/or writing some
more posts while going through the list, you may have changed your mind
and may be glad you queued what you've been writing.

> maybe others should also reconsider *not* hijacking threads by
>
> * change the subject in a reply which is *uneccaptable*
>   especially if the subjet contained the initial question
>   because all following replies inherit the change

It is *unacceptable* when someone doesn't use capital letters where they
should be used.  It makes the authors' posts harder to read, and it can
be taken as a sign that their author doesn't care whether anyone reads
them or not --- which then raises the question why the author writes
them in the first place.  Excessive use of emphazitions doesn't make
posts easier to read.

Despite removing the question a post was written to ask isn't nice, it
may be a good idea to write posts in such a way that changing the posts
subjects is possible without losing the contents (the question asked) of
the post.

> * and later even change a thread with a *clear* question in a
>   complete different direction and starting their own proposals

Some threads happen to diverge into, sometimes multiple, different
directions, with many posters becoming inspired to come forward with
what they are interested in.  When this happens, it doesn't mean that
the thread has been hijacked.

It can as well indicate that a vital discussion is going on many people
are interested in and which involves many aspects.  It is good etiquette
to change the subject of follow-ups to indicate that the discussion has
taken a new direction for instances when that is so.

The original poster is not required to follow every branch of the
discussion they have started.

> * explain the world that it needs something in a evangelic
>   style which is my decision as admin and not my question

You prefer it when people are overly blunt? ;)

You need to realise that native speakers of English have a tendency to
be overly polite and to expect others to be just as overly polite as
they are, in ways non-native speakers of English mostly cannot fathom
(at least Germans cannot).  At the same time, non-native speakers of
English (at least Germans) can come across to native speakers of English
as utterly rude, without any intention to come across like that and
without knowing that they do. --- For example, what I just wrote is
probably somewhat rude, without me intending to be.  It's because I'm
German, and the totally different mindsets of English and German
"collide", which would make it extremely complicated and requiring a
great deal of elaboration to put it in such a way that it doesn't seem
rude.

> * in general: *do not* change subjects on mailing-lists
>   if you intentionally change the direction start your own thread

Doing that has an unfortunate tendency of extinguishing even the most
interesting discussions.

> if people call me rude, short-temperedly, an asshole and whatelse
> the thread below explains perfectly how that comes if a simple
> one-line question ends in an epic off-topic discussion

The most simple questions tend to be the most difficult ones to answer.
Perhaps that's because they are the most difficult ones to ask.

However, I think I know what you mean.  I don't know of anything you
could do about it that simple questions can lead to discussions which
can make it difficult not to lose your patience.

Yet mailing lists aren't so fast paced that they don't give you time to
calm down.


-- 
Fedora release 19 (Schrödinger’s Cat)