Are threads still relevant after 3 pages of posts?

I think there's a more direct correlation to when certain posters enter a thread than the particular page at which that occurs.
 
I'd say that you're probably pretty accurate in your assessment there. If its something that hasn't been answered in a few posts there tends to be some normal conversation that creeps in there. And if its something opinion based or where there isn't a clear cut answer you will start to get some disagreements and at that point it's anarchy.
 
Well I think threads CAN stay on topic as long as there are people listening and not just talking. There are loads of threads where people are just arguing, and not making any sense - they're arguing to prove that they're RIGHT, rather than discuss the matter at hand. At that point I kinda lose interest, or just skim thru just to see if there's anything meaningful somewhere in there. But sometimes a deviation from a thread CAN be a good thing, if it is discussed and not argued...and the thread takes on its own life and goes places where the OP never intended it to go, but it's a fun ride nonetheless, and the information there is often better than the OT being discussed.
 
Nope...
hoin.gif
peace.gif
 
Last edited:
It depends on how silly the thread it to start with - relevance is inversely proportional to initial silliness
 
Re the claim that all internet discussions eventually end in someone comparing someone else to Hitler (which the act of doing now has it's own latin phrase: Reductio ad Hitlerum)

The claim wasn't made by Rob Reiner, it was by Mike Godwin of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

His claim is enshrined in "Godwin's Law", which actually has it's own Wikipedia article: Godwin's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now, what was this thread about again?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom