[Jeysie]

Lostwolfe: I agree, gentle nudges are certainly helpful.

However, this is a moderate-traffic forum, and I've seen more than a couple threads where it used to be about a certain topic... and then a few hours or a day later it suddenly has 2-3 pages or more of chatter not related to the original subject. After that it gets a lot harder to get "back on track".

So I think that a call for a certain amount of awareness is useful, since it makes it more likely that getting a thread back on subject will only require some gentle nudging as opposed to an emergency brake.

But yes, I think maybe a split or renamed section might help keep everyone happy, possibly. Or designing a few threads for chatter and then sticking to those. (We already have a few of those types of threads, after all.) That still requires everyone's cooperation to work, however, or it becomes a lot of extra work for the mods, which is unfair to them.

Peace & Luv, Liz

[BoyToy]

Originally Posted by Jeysie

One, I don't go to other forums.

Well, didn't you just start your reasoning with "At every other forum I post at ..." in your earlier post...? *tsk tsk* But I am being mean now - and I'm not serious.

Two, I like the people here. [...] They wouldn't be opinions from people I care about.

Yeah, that's a perfectly valid reason, in my opinion. But why do you like them? Only because you know them personally, to a certain degree!
And that's the point where we get to the aspect of balance, subjectivity, ect. again... which seem to me like atmospherical aspects, that can't be controlled by guidelines.

Again: The abstract goal intended might be perfectly reasonable.

I mean, sure, I want it to be balanced too! But do I have the same idea of balance like, say, Jackal...?

If I click on a thread entitled "Movies", I expect the thread to be about movies or filmmaking... I don't expect to read posts of people making googly-eyes at each other or talking about what they ate last night [...]

Yeah, you didn't expect that. But you will probably admit, that this can be also a pleasant surprise.
Conversation, and even moreso making friends, lives by digression/derailing. (Heck, philosophically speaking, one could say opening a new thread is derailing.)
Sure a positive balance between annoyance and inspiration is needed for everyone to enjoy this place!
But there we are, yet again, at the same old point of subjectivity. This paradox can't be solved, I'm afraid.

[...] though again, don't understand why people wouldn't just use IM or IRC or something *designed* for that

Well, I think, somehow, you gave the answer yourself: They like the people here, and care about their opinions. Open to participate for everyone, not just a few of them who might happen to be online at a given moment.
The online-discussion (chat) vs offline-discussion (forum) aspect is as important a difference, as is the confined-dialogue (IM) vs open-for-all-at-once (thread) aspect.
(Everybody who's ever been in the adventuregamers IRC channel, will probably say that it's a completely different 'feeling' there, compared to the foum?)

[Jeysie]

Originally Posted by BoyToy

Yeah, that's a perfectly valid reason, in my opinion. But why do you like them? Only because you know them personally, to a certain degree!
And that's the point where we get to the aspect of balance, subjectivity, ect. again... which seem to me like atmospherical aspects, that can't be controlled by guidelines.

All right. Now I'm starting to get the feeling that you think that the only way to talk about a specific topic is in a soulless, generic way that includes none of your personality.

Which, of course, is not true. If you listen to two forumites talk about music, for instance, they both have different backgrounds, personal experiences, and tastes that they'll bring to the table, and you can get an idea of what each person is like from the way they talk about music and what they choose to say. Yet, they're still talking about the thread's topic - music!

You seem to be implying that the only way to be personal and get to know each other is to talk about random stuff not related to the topic at hand... which is just simply not true.

There's also the fact that I have talked to several of the forum members about personal, random, and/or silly stuff... *outside* the forum in, again, PM, IRC, etc.

Originally Posted by BoyToy

Yeah, you didn't expect that. But you will probably admit, that this can be also a pleasant surprise.
Conversation, and even moreso making friends, lives by digression/derailing. (Heck, philosophically speaking, one could say opening a new thread is derailing.)

It might be a pleasant surprise in an IRC chat, where things are free-flowing. But in a forum, it's not appropriate. Saying, "Hey, why don't we take this to a new thread so this can stay about movies". is all it takes. Then you have a new thread about the tangent, and a thread that's still about movies. And, if it's a private conversation that only a few people will understand, you take it to a venue designed for that few people (which is not a public forum, BTW). Everyone wins.

That way, when someone who's just come in clicks on a thread expecting to read talk about movies, they don't see a whole ton of off-topic stuff and say, "Well, that sucks, I wanted to talk about movies!"

Originally Posted by BoyToy

Sure a positive balance between annoyance and inspiration is needed for everyone to enjoy this place!
But there we are, yet again, at the same old point of subjectivity. This paradox can't be solved, I'm afraid.

Er... maybe it's just me, but I don't enjoy stuff that annoys me...

Originally Posted by BoyToy

The online-discussion (chat) vs offline-discussion (forum) aspect is as important a difference, as is the confined-dialogue (IM) vs open-for-all-at-once (thread) aspect.

Except that, when you have private conversations in a thread, you're automatically confining the dialogue and closing the thread to everyone else. Ergo, you should be doing so in a venue designed for such discussions.

Peace & Luv, Liz

[BoyToy]

Nobody argues either one is the direct cause of another

Of course you are, when you propose to post less personal/sex/sillyness!
When doing so, you are implying that this is a cause.

If you thought the depency was vice-versa, you'd propose to post more 'interesting' topics.

What's been written tells a lot about what is being thought.

[BoyToy]

Originally Posted by Jeysie

All right. Now I'm starting to get the feeling that you think that the only way to talk about a specific topic is in a soulless, generic way that includes none of your personality.

Which, of course, is not true. If you listen to two forumites talk about music, for instance, [...]

Yeah, that's a good point. And I understand that my analytic way of describing it, gave you the impression I might think like you said.
The thing is: Like you implied, you can't really seperate the personal things from the rest of the conversation. Thus it would be stupid to forbid personal conversation, in my opinion.

when you have private conversations in a thread, you're automatically confining the dialogue and closing the thread to everyone else.

Isn't that's illogical? When a thread is allowed to derail, it is certainly allowed to derail again - which most of all includes coming back to the topic. I find that's just a matter of course.

[Jackal]

Disclaimer: This post was written before the recent influx of new posts.

Originally Posted by BoyToy

"Conclusions" is exactly those ideas (guidelines) you proposed in your inital post of this very thread.

These aren't conclusions of anything. They are simply observations.

So why did you choose to assume exactly that kind of stuff? If you don't understand what I meant, then why don't you ask first?
The fact you choose to draw all those negative conclusions speaks for itself.

No, I didn't really need to assume. It was plainly evident. I should have chosen a better word.

If you get criticised, try to think about it, and deal with it.

So, yet another insinuation that enough thought isn't put into any aspect of this. Since you know nothing of the due consideration given to each and every one of these issues, including the anticipated objections which have been predictably brought up, such comments are simply unwarranted.

Let me, for once, repeat something that has been said before in this thread: There is a difference between not-understanding and disagreeing.
You don't seem to understand that.

No, BoyToy. I understand this difference extremely well. Which is why I'm waiting for the vocal objectors to show an actual understanding of this entire issue. I get that you disagree, and that's absolutely fine, and even explaining your reasons why you think so is fine. But most of these arguments do NOT show that understanding, and are just more rationalization for disagreement. Again, whether by lines taken out of context, issues isolated, whatever. If your disagreement is obscuring the fact that you understand, then there's no distinction at all.

(And on top of that, I did explicitly say that I do understand your issue, in the very first line of my posting! Maybe I didn't understand every bit exactly the way you meant it. But you can rest assured I got the gist of it.)

And yet you don't seem to understand the fundamental nature of it. But fine, if you tell me that you understand this entire exercise is a very simple call for people to show some consideration of others and be mindful that the forum doesn't become overrun by the issues highlighted, I'll believe you. But any arguments that go beyond that will defy that claim.

What I really don't understand, and what makes me angry, is the subtle malignity with which you tend to react to criticism. (And please forgive me, that I am acting similar now, as I don't see a point it trying to hide the emotions I now have.)
Are you really such a bigheaded stubborn hypocrit?

Criticism, no. Erroneous accusations, fallacious arguments, repetitive talking points, etc. by people seeking to endlessly promote their views, yes. If indeed it's subtle "malignity", then I'm being largely successful at stifling my outright frustration and annoyance. I also see no point in hiding my own emotions as if I'm a drone, and by the time it's noticeable, the recipients are anything but innocent victims.

Bigheaded? Sometimes. Stubborn? Most certainly. Hypocrite, no. If there's a relevant point in the character evaluation, I'm missing it.

I have no reason to doubt this. And if you spend your whole life thinking about a particulary issue, this doesn't mean that you will automatically come up with the right solution.

Obviously. Since I was responding to your assumption that we hadn't "appropriately considered" a point, your argument above has nothing to do with the original exchange.

Don't you see? You are so busy justifying yourself, that you tend to not reflect what's being said anymore.

Not a single point has been raised here that wasn't ALREADY carefully considered long before the post went up in the first place. Not one. What you call "justification" is really just "explanation". I'm just tired of repeating it, and if I sound frustrated in doing it, I can live with that. From the looks of things, I'm not the only one frustrated by it, either.

So the problem still is (and I'd assume you are aware of that) that reasonable balance is a term like wax.

Of course. Which is why we can't enforce it or even effectively moderate it. But even a variance in people's understanding of "balance" would be a lot closer to something mutually acceptable than what we have now. Now people know the goal, they know the areas of imbalance, and at least everyone is moving more or less in the same direction. That would not have happened without some kind of directive.

Do I get you right now, that you actually don't mean it as an absolute 'no-no'? (That would change your initial statement a lot!)

Nothing listed is an "absolute" no-no. There are all kinds of disclaimers throughout the original post to indicate that. That's why I specifically requested people not to isolate issues or take them out of context.

And for the record, this sort of "misunderstanding" is exactly why I keep saying that some people don't understand the fundamental nature of this exercise. Everyone that DOES understand seems to realize we're not becoming at all draconian.

My theory is, that it is because there simply aren't enough 'interesting' new topics coming up.

And that would be the exact same theory my original post already supported:

Originally Posted by guideline post

Really it's up to you forumites to make this work. We can't moderate thoughtfulness, we can't dictate common sense, we can't police discretion. We can only ask that you be respectful of those outside your inner circle, and be mindful of the goals of the forum. To those who have fallen away from Chit Chat because of less desirable changes over time, now's the time for you to make contributions as well. Start a thread, post your opinion, get involved again. If we can get moving in more or less the same direction again, it'll take everyone to accomplish it.

Again, you see why I say that these arguments aren't showing an understanding? When the objections raised have already been taken into account and addressed, there's really no other recourse but for me to tell people they haven't understood. I don't expect them to like hearing it, but I won't pretend otherwise.

But you could be wrong, too. So please stop discrediting the people, who disagree your opinion, with polemic allegations like they wouldn't understand your opinions. Comprehend?

See above.

[Jeysie]

Originally Posted by BoyToy

Thus it would be stupid to forbid personal conversation, in my opinion.

There's a big difference between...

"Remember the time we went to see Summer Movie of the Month, Gus? Yeah, that was great. Y'see, Gus was hiding under the chair when that ghost attacked after the stairway scene! Did any of you think it was scary? I thought it was funny, you could see the wires, for pity's sake. And Random McActor's line delivery, oh, that was bad. He... said... every... word... like... this...."

"Pfft. *You* say it was funny, but man, that ghost was creepy! You could barely see the wires because of the lighting, and the camera angle was all at a creepy tilt...

"And, yeah, Random was bad, but Lolita Loveinterest was really good... or, at least, she looks hot in that dress... anyone else with me on this?"

or

"Remember when we went to the movies last week, Gus? And you hid under the chair? Ha, ha!"

"Hey, I was scared! That movie was creepy!"

"Pfft, it was fake... and the lead guy was sooo bad..."

"Yeah, but that girl he was with looked so hot..."

Yes, both are "personal conversations" to an extent, but the former is a lot more explanitory about the shared experience and open to feedback from others, whereas the latter conversation would just have me feeling lost.

And if the former conversation is in a thread devoted to "Latest movies" as opposed to "US Elections" or whatever, there you go.

Originally Posted by BoyToy

Isn't that's illogical? When a thread is allowed to derail, it is certainly allowed to derail again - which most of all includes coming back to the topic. I find that's just a matter of course.

Which brings me to my earlier post...

So I think that a call for a certain amount of awareness is useful, since it makes it more likely that getting a thread back on subject will only require some gentle nudging as opposed to an emergency brake.

Peace & Luv, Liz

[BoyToy]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

You take offence at Jackal's suggestion that you are taking things out of context, but IMHO the only way you could interpret this sentence as an absolute would be disregarding the rest of the post

Yes indeed I did take offence. And I do take offence at your accusation, that I took this sentence out of context, as well to be honest.

Where's the "personal conversations are not appropriate, period."-quote taken out of context?! The "period" makes it an absolutely absolute statement. Thus there is not much of conext left.

It's sometimes subtle things, you know. But if you are seriously trying to say, this sentence doesn't come across as an absolute in Jackals initial message, you are skewing cause and effect.

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by lostwolfe

i generally tend to read the subjects that look like they're going to be interesting to me - and then, i really only stick to page one. if i know there's a thread that i can add to, i'll add to it [i've even dredged up a couple in the past, when i knew the subject directly related to what i wanted to say]

otherwise, i read and leave alone. the way i think about it is, if i'm simply not interested in part-taking i don't.

I suspect this is what a lot of people do. Which is why the fact that so many current threads are similar and narrowly-focused becomes discouraging to the wider community. And if people open up the topics they do think will be interesting and find that they're filled with more of the same, that compounds the problem. The longer that goes on, the less reason to keep visiting. It finally just reached the point where it was time to say something. (I'm just using your point to reinforce our decision, not suggesting you were contradicting it at all.)

i come from misetings.com [which is a magic humour site] and that particular board - from an outsider's point of view probably seems completely out of control, but it works, becasue the /forumites/ [in the end] dictate what they want to read and how much. [there are more strict rules there - they have an active policy on how long a thread may "live" and other such rules, but misetings has survived, because their /members/ take the lead in what they want to see. [there is, to whit, even a survivor thread to ban people who they aren't fond of that are basically doing the community a disservice.]

Interesting. This is indeed an extreme example, though not all THAT different from what I was trying to accomplish with this. We want the community as a whole to be mindful of the same basic goals, and work together to achieve it. We certainly don't want to moderate more heavily, and it's the forumites that need to make it work.

this is how i feel about moderators: gentle nudges, i think, work better [in fact, i'd suggest that actual forumites gently nudge, too] - if you feel something is straying way off topic, or becoming too cliquey, or something of that nature, simply say so. if the poster keeps /repeatedly/ offending, let the moderators know. that's what they're there for. [among other reasons]

Yep. And again, this is exactly the sort of atmosphere that we're trying to foster. And until the actual issues were outlined, people probably didn't feel they had the right or the means to change it. As some have mentioned, attempts to nudge gently without some kind of official directive were simply ignored. Hopefully now they won't be.

Originally Posted by BoyToy

The "period" makes it an absolutely absolute statement. Thus there is not much of conext left.

No context? You mean besides the line immediately after that confirms a certain amount is acceptable? See, fixating on one or two particular words or phrases to poke holes in the entire issue is exactly the sort of dead end conversation I wanted to avoid by saying:

Originally Posted by guidelines, again

You're welcome to weigh in on this, but please don't bother arguing specifics. Of course I'm generalizing and trying to summarize (believe it or not, this is summarized!) complex issues in simple terms, so I'm sure people can find trivial points to debate. But the basic trends are indisputable, as is the consensus among staff that a change is needed, so I'm hoping for some positive results going forward, even if we stumble a bit trying to find our way.

[Relek]

Is the Thead must die! thread going to be locked? That one annoys me, most forums have them and they are pretty good fun at first but now it's just 690 pages of completely random crap, just full of random people going "I have just killed the thread! zomg!" (myself included).

[Jackal]

I think if enough people are still posting to it, it's serving an evident purpose. (As opposed to one or two people continually resurrecting it from oblivion.)

Again, keep in mind that we're really not looking to enforce more than we have to. If you think the thread should really die, throw your opinion into the thread itself and see where it leads.

[BoyToy]

Originally Posted by Jackal

These aren't conclusions of anything. They are simply observations.

How can guidelines/suggestions be observations, when you want to change something through those guidelines?

Sure there are parts where you simply describe observations (of how CC is, and how it should be). But you also go further an make suggestions/guidelines on how to act on the forum. Fair enough. But those are certainly conclusions from your observations.

No, I didn't really need to assume. It was plainly evident. I should have chosen a better word

Well, maybe the rather analytical/clinical tone didn't make it sound too amicable. That's for granted.*)
But it wasn't rude or discreditive. (Or was it? Please point out, what gave you that negative impression.) It was even constructive.

The only thing that's left is the mere fact, that I was expressing my opinion, that your opinion is wrong. (Left aside, that I was trying to constructively bring forward the discussion.) If that prompts you to such reaction, then yes, I think you can't deal with criticism.

[ *) That's one of the reasons, why I reacted allergic to the 'personal-aspect prohibition'. ]

Obviously. Since I was responding to your assumption that we hadn't "appropriately considered" a point, your argument above has nothing to do with the original exchange.

OK, I see what you mean there, that's correct.

Not a single point has been raised here that wasn't ALREADY carefully considered long before the post went up in the first place.

Alright, I'll take your word for it. But not one of those considerations were mentioned in your guideline post.
So why didn't you reply with your reasons to those arguments and questions? (Instead you preferred to simply repeat yourself. You could have saved that effort.)

Of course. Which is why we can't enforce it or even effectively moderate it. But even a variance in people's understanding of "balance" would be a lot closer to something mutually acceptable than what we have now.

Yeah. I always saw the good overall intention. And I agree, that raising the awareness will probably have a positive effect. But in my strong belief about the nature of forums, I am saying it will only be a short-term effect.

Thus, I think, it would be better if the forumites constantly 'nudged' themselves, if someone gets annoyed too much by something. It doesn't make sense to keep dissatisfaction, or even anger, hidden behind the keyboard. (Still a matter/problem of balance, though.)

And for the record, this sort of "misunderstanding" is exactly why I keep saying that some people don't understand the fundamental nature of this exercise. Everyone that DOES understand seems to realize we're not becoming at all draconian.

Well, then I might have 'misunderstood' an important part of what you initially said. And I'm glad if I did.

But you seem to think that such misunderstandings are the sole fault of the reader. (I am drawing this conclusion from the tone in lines.)
I honestly don't think your formulation of that particular point in the guideline post was expressing what you actually meant. I'd say it was misleading (though presumably not intentional).

Anyway, it's cleared-up now. This makes the whole 'guideline post' less dramatic too me. And I probably wouldn't even have started to get involved at all, if it was clear from the beginning.
Maybe I am really the only one who finds that misunderstandable, but maybe you should edit that post to make your point clear for possible newcomers?

Well, lets see what happens on the forum.

[BoyToy]

Originally Posted by guideline, again

You're welcome to weigh in on this, but please don't bother arguing specifics. Of course I'm generalizing and trying to summarize (believe it or not, this is summarized!) complex issues in simple terms, so I'm sure people can find trivial points to debate. But the basic trends are indisputable, as is the consensus among staff that a change is needed, so I'm hoping for some positive results going forward, even if we stumble a bit trying to find our way.

Yeah I consciously took liberty to disobey that request. Cause that kind of "we-know-it-better-than-you,-just-trust-us" approach is an example for the kind of bigheadedness, I was referring to.

Can you understand why people might feel that way?

No context? You mean besides the line immediately after that confirms a certain amount is acceptable?

Yes, cause that line is continued... only to discount that 'certain amount'-option in the very same sentence again. (In an arrogant way, btw.)

[BoyToy]

Originally Posted by Jeysie

So I think that a call for a certain amount of awareness is useful, since it makes it more likely that getting a thread back on subject will only require some gentle nudging as opposed to an emergency brake.

Well, I don't think raised awareness will make it much easier to bring derailed threads back on topic. (Mostly cause I think most people aren't behaving rude on this forum anyway, and usually would act accordingly, if they got nudged. But, OK, maybe that is an effect.)

I could imagine that raised awareness could bring one other good thing. That is people more easily daring to nudge at all.

[Jeysie]

Originally Posted by BoyToy

Cause that kind of "we-know-it-better-than-you,-just-trust-us" approach is an example for the kind of bigheadedness, I was referring to.

Well, I certainly hope they know better than we do on how to run a forum... that's why they're the mods. If the mods didn't know how to run the forum properly, I'd be pretty worried.

I should also mention that I've been mod at a forum before, and what they're saying is pretty spot on with keeping a forum working. I've seen forums dissolve into lots of drivel before because the nonsense, silliness, and off-topic drifting was allowed to run rampant. By then, most of the regulars had left the forum completely because they were tired of it.

Originally Posted by BoyToy

Well, I don't think raised awareness will make it much easier to bring derailed threads back on topic.

It might in the sense that people might be more self-aware that they're starting to get off-topic and stop themselves before the chatter reaches critical mass of needing a hard-brake return to the subject. The nudging would just be a friendly reminder.

Peace & Luv, Liz

[Jackal]

BoyToy, this thread has suffered enough from tangential issues, and I'm not going to further derail it by continuing a you said/I said analysis of old posts. If you want to continue with that particular conversation, you're welcome to PM me and we'll carry on elsewhere.

Yeah. I always saw the good overall intention. And I agree, that raising the awareness will probably have a positive effect. But in my strong belief about the nature of forums, I am saying it will only be a short-term effect.

Sure, it may very well be a short-lived benefit. That doesn't mean it's not worth doing anyway.

Thus, I think, it would be better if the forumites constantly 'nudged' themselves, if someone gets annoyed too much by something. It doesn't make sense to keep dissatisfaction, or even anger, hidden behind the keyboard. (Still a matter/problem of balance, though.)

Certainly. And hopefully now they'll feel enabled and encouraged to do so. But that wasn't happening, and wasn't going to start happening, unless something was said. So now it's said, and people that don't like it can get pissed at me instead of each other.

But you seem to think that such misunderstandings are the sole fault of the reader. (I am drawing this conclusion from the tone in lines.)

Not at all. I'm more than happy to clarify misunderstandings. As you said, all people need to do is ask. Big difference between asking and arguing.

[Spikey]

Hey folks,

Just stopped in because of a link on my forums posted by Jeysie (we were talking about good offtopic and bad offtopic). I'll link some comments if you guys care.

But I'm not posting because of that. I'm posting because as someone who runs 2 Sierra themed forums, I *really* identify with and like what Jackal has written. I'm tempted to ask whether I can use it as a guideline for offtopic sections, it's really that good.

And I should point out that I've never visited the AG offtopic section (only ontopic, I post offtopic stuff elsewhere), nor have I read this thread after page 1- but 7 pages of this? No thanks.

But anyway. I think if you argue that having offtopic guidelines destablises a community, you're msising the point. Offtopic is a *secondary* point of communication for tight knit communities, after you've posted about AG's for example you want to say something about the US elections, or whatever.

That's not to say people are too immature or unintelligent or whatever (to post sensibly in offtopic, that is), but if offtopic becomes a virus that infects other threads and derails anything remotely about something, you have a problem. Offtopic should be on topic, as paradoxical as that might seem (at least, as far as individual threads go, unless they're the rare nonsense thread, which is different), and I think the way Jackal phrased it couldn't be better- everyone should read his/her original post(s). Well said, bravo.

I'm certainly more likely to visit/post in OT if Jackal's rules are followed.

EDIT: I also think this notion of people being completely autonomous has merit (as in, treating OT as some kind of IRC deal or blog of whatever), because it allows a forum to be infinitely more personal and closeknit. I'm sure that's what people like BoyToy and pinkgothic are complaining about, that they feel that sort of 'freedom' will be eroded.

However, the followup point has to be that on every occasion I've seen a forum that used such a system (for example, this one, and the SubChan, as Jeysie alluded to above) it got abused. People basically post whatever (things like Jeysie said, offtopic threads go offtopic so many times you have to start a 'mirror topic', i.e. the same topic again, to keep talking about it!) and when people don't think before they post, the overall post quality level can only get worse. I speak from experience!

Regards,
- Spike

P.S. Kinda nostalgic to see people like Jeysie, Lostwolfe and myself being conciliatory on an issue like this, reminds me vastly of similar things happening with similar people at the SubChan.

P.P.S. I also think I can explain Jeysie's various forums but only one forum apparent contradiction- I visit various Sierra-themed forums, but I consider very few of them either good forums or well-balanced (as in, good general vs offtopic discussion balance) or even just places I'd want to visit.
So to me, that's how you can visit various forums, even be a member of various forums, but only seriously be a part of one- it's the only one you (truly) care about.

[Jeysie]

Originally Posted by Spikey

P.P.S. I also think I can explain Jeysie's various forums but only one forum apparent contradiction- I visit various Sierra-themed forums, but I consider very few of them either good forums or well-balanced (as in, good general vs offtopic discussion balance) or even just places I'd want to visit.
So to me, that's how you can visit various forums, even be a member of various forums, but only seriously be a part of one- it's the only one you (truly) care about.

Well, that's part of it, yes... there are a couple other places I visit, but this is the one I feel most emotionally involved in right now.

I have to be honest and admit that it was mainly a very poor choice of phrasing on my part, though. My meaning wasn't intended as "I never post/have posted anywhere else"... but more of... "This is one of the places I enjoy posting at, so I'd prefer OT here to be a place I want to post too, rather than having to limit myself to just other places with OT stuff". Just stupid/bad choice of words on my part.

I just figured that, since BoyToy said he "wasn't serious", he had an inkling of what I meant, so it wasn't worth protesting about it.

Peace & Luv, Liz

[Spiwak]

Can this thread just end already?

[Tobbe]

Originally Posted by Spiwak

Can this thread just end already?

Exactly.