" > Speculation about the next firmware (PR1.2) starring drunk Laughingstok as Chuck Norris"

Misrepresenting the subject of the thread is not helping keep it in order.

In fact, it is making it worse. Great strategy.

Seriously, geneven, much ado about nothing IMO.

EDIT: besides, you've complained bitterly before about moderators "keeping things in order". You're very difficult to satisfy in this regard. But I'll do my best overall.

EDIT 2: Sorry, there was no need for me to get personal. Let me try again: I am having a difficult time understanding exactly what sort of approach you prefer.

tex, i'm afraid i really don't understand what you're trying to say here.

from my POV, a thread is to be judged by its original intention/topic. if i create a thread about using infrared on the n900, the thread is to be in "n900". it has to remain there even if on page 50 people start talking about chocolate muffins. the thread was meant to be about the n900, and that's what its title reflects.

now if some moderator thinks its funny to change the thread title to "chocolate muffins" and then use this as a lame excuse to move the whole thing - including the infrared-related posts at the beginning - to off topic, i'd be p'ssed. it's my thread after all.

you said yourself in one of your previous posts that moderators cannot (and i'd say: should not) move threads around according to what's being discussed in these threads at the moment. so you have 2 options:
1) leave threads where they were and belonged to in the beginning, with the original post.
2) cut threads and open new ones as soon as the first muffin-post appears in an infrared-thread, keeping both infrared and muffin-threads clean.

option 2) is not an option as it breaks the flow of the conversation. therefore, leaving things as they are is the only thing that works IMHO.

EDIT: Looks like I misinterpreted Benny's point. Ignore the below. I'll try again when I'm lucid.

Benny, you seem to assume threads should be mostly static. That is not always the case. The thread in question is perfect evidence. I continue to believe the right move was made in relocating it, and that the joke rename is/was harmless both in intent (certainly when I did it tonight) and deed.

Sometimes a thread plays out, the original premise exhausted, and it mutates into something else. This is not new to the internet (or traditional dialog, either) so I don't get the complaints. I see conversation as a "living thing", prone to organic development and sometimes the bell curve of original thought is peaked and crossed with no real means of climbing back up to it. If a major shift occurs, a good moderator takes several factors into consideration and either closes or repurposes the thread.

I'm not saying that out of sheer stubbornness. I am open to persuasion by the right argument.

Basically, though, I'm looking for a complaint from Dave999 and have not seen one. In this case, his preference is paramount over yours and geneven's. No offense intended.

I'm going to give you such a pinch!

thanks

Texrat:

Among other things, I am complaining that my messages in that thread have been misrepresented because they have nothing to do with the topic that you have changed the header to. Feel free to examine them -- I wish you would! They are strictly on the original topic.

My being represented as participating in a thread partly about Chuck Norris is untrue. The only reason I would nw participate in a thread with the current name is that you have basically made it impossible to discuss the original topic without being frivolous.

Why not just rename it to Hitler Fans Speak Out? That would be really fun!

@Texrat:

I'm getting really frustrated with this discussion. First I say threads should not be moved around according to their *current* content. What you answer is that with this approach, "moderators will be constantly busy changing the titles of legitimate threads that wander off, on and around a topic." - as if I had suggested that.

Then I say that threads do have this tendency of leaving the original subject, making it über-obvious with a infrared vs. chocolate muffin example... and your answer is that I "assume threads should be mostly static".

I really cannot think of any way to make my point more clear, yet it seems everything I say gets turned around 180° until it's the exact opposite. I simply don't know how to continue in such a situation...

geneven,

Threads change. C'est la vie, c'est la guerre. And I'm too tired to deal with pointless hyperbole.

benny1967,

Sorry, I guess my exhaustion has affected my ability to follow your train of thought.

I'm frustrated by this exchange, too. I really don't see the issue. And still waiting for a complaint from the OP (Dave999).

Ok, I'm not going to revisit anything we've already gone over because in reading back over it my head still gets dizzy from the point-counterpoint. So let me just summarize my position (and note it is just mine) on this overblown PR1.2 thread debacle:

- The PR1.2 thread was started by Dave999 in all seriousness but as even serious threads tend to over time it became a parody of itself. No harm in that. It's natural. No thread lives forever.

- Another moderator decided it had outlived its original usefulness, moved it to Off Topic, and added "Chuck Norris" to the title as a harmless joke reflecting some of the recent posts

- Dave999 was asked if he wanted everything restored and I have not seen him request that

- Out of the thousands of posters here TWO lodged formal complaints

I think a tremendous uproar is being made by two people over something the original thread creator has not complained about. I'm not dismissive of those opinions. I just disagree with them. If I'm overruled in that disagreement, so be it. I don't really have a stake in it. I'm just another member here who volunteers his time to help keep this place from descending into chaos, and I answer to the community. So if there's a consensus that moving an exhausted thread to Off Topic and tacking a tongue-cheek comment onto the title is Serious Internet Business, and met by more than what I see to be misguided pedanticism, I'm sure the original moderator and I will be overruled.

So start a poll. Start a campaign. Do whatever you feel is worth your time and principles. But I'm not going to argue this any more. I'll abide by the will of the community.