When is Off-Topic Actually Off-Topic?*

[Griffin]

Cutter and I have been accused of being #offtopic#.

As you can well imagine, these accusations have taken the parent thread even more #offtopic#.

In the spirit of on-topicedness, I have started this thread to continue the dissertation in a more appropriate setting.

Just because one finishes up a post with a statement that may or may not correct the course of the topic of the given thread, does not call attention away from the fact that it has been diverted from its natural course from what has been written at the beginning of such post.

My esteemed colleague has introduced an interesting point. I do, however, completely disagree with him. Here is an analogy to reinforce my position:

On a road trip, from City A to City B, a person may need to make a pit-stop along the way (to get a drink or some lunch, for example). Once this pit-stop has ended and the person gets back onto the road, resuming the original course, they are said to be "resuming" their road trip.

Ergo, if a person makes an observation in a thread - though it may seem off-topic - but they continue on with the original discussion, they are infact still on-topic.

Hopefully my most honourable colleague will feel at liberty to continue on with this debate.

[cutter]

Thank you, Griff for withdrawing from the aforementioned thread to continue this benign and somewhat ridiculous debate.

This said - what you said above, as in typical Griffin fashion SOUNDS good, but in fact does not make any sense whatsoever.

So, in your technicolor dream world, consider the following example:

I come across and read a thread (for lack of a better example) about melee attacks. I then feel the unending urge to respond, but spend 95% of my reply post (let's say 400 words) describing my feelings towards Dale Earnhardt Jr.'s performance in the latest Nascar Nextel Cup race. In your seemingle unending words of wisdom (which I am totally used to trying to decipher, by the way) this would be an appropriate post in that thread, as long as I end it with:

"Yeah, I like sneaking up on a guy and #bash#ing him too!!"

Is this correct? Seems to me that's a fair interpretation of your continuance of our debate as listed above. Paralells can be drawn to the offending thread as pointed out by our fellow forumite, Bren.

As always, I am available at your convenience to continue this discussion further.

Best regards, and how are the wife and kids anyway? Deana is fine, THANKS for asking!

[3º] Cutter

[Griffin]

Seems to me that's a fair interpretation of your continuance of our debate as listed above. Paralells can be drawn to the offending thread as pointed out by our fellow forumite, Bren.

As pointed out by my worthy debate opponent, who apparently can't locate the "Spell Check" button below, my original analogy was somewhat flawed.

Here is a better one:
Imagine a person, Bren for instance, who is driving with the soon-to-be Mrs. Bren on the aforementioned road trip from City A to City B. That person, while driving, makes an observation about how Cutter is always going off-topic. Bren , the whole time continuing to drive to City B, has not veered off course, but has instead made a casual observation.

In the previously off-topic thread, Bren made an observation and then proceeded to take the Rock Porter thread "Road Trip" back on course.

The girls are fine, thank you for asking. I didn't ask about Deana because I made sure she was fine last night.

[cutter]

As usual, Griffin has made an incorrect parallel to the situation at hand. He is now mixing activities and conversation, mistakenly thinking that they are one-in-the-same. While two activities may be done at once, and a conversation may occur while an activity is taking place. Two conversations cannot occur with any sort of clarity, if one was to remotely desire and sensical understanding.

For instance, if one were say... (for the lack of a better example...) in the act of making love to one's wife or girlfriend ( #thumbsup# or both #thumbsup# ) and the conversation was getting a little, you know, heated? And you respond to a request to do something "a little special" with a comment about how lumpy your grandmother's oatmeal was at the previous weekend's family breakfast get-together after church last Sunday.

This conversation may abruptly end, as two conversations cannot occupy the same space. BUT - if done right - the ACTIVITY may still resume (even if it involves taking some subject matter from the offending conversation and applying it to the activity).

For better clarity, shall we use the instance that you have revised in the above post, as an example?

Mr. and soon-to-be Mrs. Bren are driving to City B and having a fine conversation about the rising price of rice in China. Mrs. Bren makes a comment about her feelings about the rice... Mr. Bren makes a comment about his feelings about Dale Earnhardt Jr.'s performance in the latest NASCAR Nextel Cup race.

Confused and slightly bewildered, Mrs. Bren would either try to correct the course of the conversation back to the rice, or switch the conversation to the Nascar talk. They would not successfully have both conversations simultaneously. ALL THIS SAID - the ACTIVITY of driving to City B would not be affected.

So you see, Griffin, the fact that you have mixed up the act of an activity and the act of conversation does not have any merit in this thread. I refer your attention to the Conversation vs Conversation issue above, so you can make an attempt at further mistaken parallels.

Once more, I bid you best regards,

[3º] Cutter

[Griffin]

Cutter, while I do see your point and respect your opinion, I must point out several flaws in you logic.

1. As I know that you have very little experience in love-making, I should point out that there are seldom conversations going on. Perhaps, in your example, they were talking about oatmeal, and the female partner was merely making an aside by her request. Most people are capable of processing thoughts and ideas about more than one topic at a time.

Mr. and soon-to-be Mrs. Bren are driving to City B and having a fine conversation about the rising price of rice in China. Mrs. Bren makes a comment about her feelings about the rice... Mr. Bren makes a comment about his feelings about Dale Earnhardt Jr.'s performance in the latest NASCAR Nextel Cup race.

2. In your example, these two topics are not necessarily exclusive of one another. Both of them are a complete waste of time. Although more intelligent people eat rice than watch or care about NASCAR.

Thank you for this discussion. Send my regards to Deana. #hug#

[Hood]

roflmao!

I believe both gentlemen have valid arguments in this regard. As in many situations, it is possible for both to be correct from their own standpoint. Few situations afford an 'absolute truth', but I humbly believe I may be able to pinpoint it somewhat closer in this case.

Cutter is correct that a post comprised 90% of off-topic material could (and should) be regarded as being off-topic. Of course, this would also depend on just how FAR off the material was. Perhaps this 90% of materials is (as has been oft mentioned) about Nascar. A thread originally slated for discussion about melee attacks could be adversely derailed by such a post, as likely 90% of the REPLY may very well now be about Nascar.

Griffin is also correct in that completely-off-topic statements given briefly or as part of a larger reply in most cases will not to a great extent affect the final destination of the discussion. An excellent example of such is Cutter's inquiry above as to the health and stability of Griffin's marriage/family.

Best regards, and how are the wife and kids anyway? Deana is fine, THANKS for asking!

Cutter's method of introducing this materials was perfect. While the question itself completely off-topic, it was at the same time complimentary to the greater portion of his completely relevant post. His question was not designed to change the course of the conversation.

This is where the accountability falls, however: on the subsequent poster(s). If Griffin had spent his entire reply answering this one question, Griffin would have been guilty of carrying the thread TOO FAR off-topic, not Cutter. As it happens, Griffin's response was perfectly appropriate. He carried the thread successfully and at the same time included a brief reassurance as to his marital status as well as his contribution to Cutter's.

The girls are fine, thank you for asking. I didn't ask about Deana because I made sure she was fine last night.

Simply put, the amount of off-topic material in a post, as well as to the relevancy of it, has to be weighed. This is true both of the original off-topic mention as well as the subsequent replies.

For lack of a better example, imagine this:
Mr. and soon-to-be Mrs. Bren are driving from to City B, discussing her penchant for Chinese rice. Mr. Bren proceeds to confuse his wife by jumping mid-conversation to his hero's Nascar standing. Mrs. Bren is upset by her newlywed husband's lack of sensitivity, and smacks his head. Mr. Bren, trying to shield himself, lets go of the steering wheel. His car swerves, hits a mailbox, and sends it flying through the window of Cutter's bedroom where until that moment he had been making love to his wife and girlfriend. #thumbsup# Regardless of his comment made a moment earlier about his grandmother's after-church oatmeal, their lovemaking session is now in even greater jepoardy, since on their posterbed both he and the mailbox cannot occupy the same space.

Granted, both activities may as yet recover from this. Mr. Bren screaming insanely while his wife steers the car back onto the road from the passenger seat, and Cutter's wife and girlfriend (who is presumably Griffin's wife) removing the penny's catalog from Cutter's nethers and hopefully finding enough left to work with.

Still, huge unwelcome distractions such as these should be avoided, while smaller off-topic comments made as part of a larger on-topic reply may very well just make life interesting.

[nc]Bren]

Great,Now there is a whole thread talking about me saying that 2 people are off-topic.I get what you mean Cutter but if i didn't warn you you 2 could have continued and got in to trouble with Skelito.So would u rather get a warning letter and maybe a ban or just a person saying that you two are off-topic?I chose the one i thought you would preffer..
Let alone it is your choice if you are going to admit you were going off-topic or whathever,its your choice now..

[Griffin]

brendan said:

Great,Now there is a whole thread talking about me saying that 2 people are off-topic.I get what you mean Cutter but if i didn't warn you you 2 could have continued and got in to trouble with Skelito.So would u rather get a warning letter and maybe a ban or just a person saying that you two are off-topic?I chose the one i thought you would preffer..
Let alone it is your choice if you are going to admit you were going off-topic or whathever,its your choice now..

#hijack#

While, at first glance, your reply may seem on-top, Bren, I think under closer analysis you will see that you are the one off-topic now. #nono#

This topic is a scholarly debate about off-topicness. It is not a discussion about the consequences, real or imagined, of going off-topic in another thread.

You may wish to review this material and consider whether or not you have anything pertinent to add. Thank you for having our best interests in mind.

Respectfully Yours,
Griffin.

P.S. Sorry for the diversion I think that it is time to return this thread to the noble persuit of knowledge under which it was formed.
#thx#

[Hood]

I believe Griffin is right, Bren. Had you contributed to the subject of your driving skills, premarital conversation habits, or Cutter's [lack of] experience, it would have proved most useful. That's all we really care about anyway...
#rockon#

[cutter]

hood said:

I believe Griffin is right, Bren. Had you contributed to the subject of your driving skills, premarital conversation habits, or Cutter's [lack of] experience, it would have proved most useful. That's all we really care about anyway...
#rockon#

Oh... Whoa there, cowboy... What's this comment about lack of experience??? See there may be an assumption (albeit mistaken one) that may take this thread of topic as well, because alas - a stone has been cast and I shall feel some need to derail it to defend myself.

Let's not get hasty when it comes to my ninja sextifying skills. (I'm the best I've ever seen on the numbchucks too.)

[Griffin]

Let's not get hasty when it comes to my ninja sextifying skills. (I'm the best I've ever seen on the numbchucks too.)

Don't believe anything Cutter types, he's an unsavoury character. He's been known to tell me, "We're married, we don't do that sort of thing anymore." The only chucks he's been handling are pretty numb from self-manipulation. #clapping#

[©Slingshot]

Ok, I have thought about all this, and as far as I can tell, the whole off topic debate started right after this comment :

cutter said:

I LOVE letting a guy THINK he's going to score and then #bash#ing him when he's JUST about at home base...

That must be what women feel like when they are doing that thing where Griffin THINKS he's going to get some then he has to go to the washroom for a while?

Now, this post was good, the first part was on topic, no problem.....

However Cutter cleverly left bait for someone to pick up and go off topic........ hence the comment about Griffin and his washroom antics......

Although this last comment was not really following the original topic, it was not really something that you can call off topic......
It was a reference to something outside of the topics field, while being loosley related to the threads topic...

In my eye, the person who was the first to go "off topic" was infact :

griffin said:

I have to go into the washroom so I have enough room to manuever into the tunnel, so to speak. It's hard to aim a pool-cue length organ without the room to work.
#clapping#

There was no reference to the original subject in the thread......(Griffin was having a little fun here, possibly as a result of being overly boared at work, and out of staples, rubber bands and thumbtacks to fire at the back of Cutter's head!)

Anyhow, this whole off topic thing has spurred quite a debate....

Now Bren,

Don't worry about these two (Griffin and Cutter)........They are just winding you up.........

Most likley Both of these two, having run out of rubberbands, screwed up office memos, staples, erasers etc, and having nothing to throw at each other probably just baited us to see how us, the members react to an off topic post...


Well the bait was taken, and the trap sprung.....

Can this all be put to bed (no sexual reference intended) and left to be laughed at by guests and new members......

?

[Hood]

slngshot said:

Don't worry about these two (Griffin and Cutter)........They are just winding you up.........

SURELY you people know better than to take anything we say here seriously... uh, right?
By now most should know that all of griff's posts are #cookoo# and most of cutter's replies like #wtf#

As for mine, well, mine are just #censored#. Was great thread, though!

[Griffin]

By now most should know that all of griff's posts are #cookoo#

Hey - I resemble, I mean resent, that remark.

I had a very lively and scholarly debate going on.

[Hood]

griffin said:

I had a very lively and scholarly debate going on.

Yeah, we need more like that, I was laughing my ass off most of the time. Can't wait till you two start the next one...