Thread crapping: a definition

Nathan

Nathan

SF VIP
Location
High Desert- Calif.
Thread crapping

v. Thread crapping occurs when a person comes into a thread and posts something contrary to the spirit/intent of the thread, often derailing the discussion or turning it into an argument.
Coming into a thread titled "I love my new Apple Macintosh!", and posting "PCs are better and cheaper" is thread crapping.

Some have wondered why recent threads(Gay Pride Month and Louisiana Ten Commandments) were locked. Some people insist that they were merely expressing their "god given" rights to free speech. That's OK, if a thread is designed and intended to stimulate debate and attract differing points of view. However, some take the opportunity to express their negative thoughts and feelings, in total disregard and disrespect for the OP(original poster).
Thread crapping often becomes a form of harassment, being passive but aggressive, nonetheless.

This thread is not about my lifestyle, my favorite food, computer type or movie, so if you feel the need to exercise your First Amendment / god given right then you are more than welcome to comment....I won't be offended.
 

OMG, I just realized I have done 'conversation crapping' a lot in real life, no wonder I struggle with social interactions. So, when someone tells me they love their new apple watch, if I'm not supposed to say 'I like my Fitbit watch because it does a lot of the same stuff while being gobs cheaper', what should I say? Just, 'oh cool tell me about it'? But that's not about ME, sighhhh, being a people is hard.
 

HoneyNut said:
OMG, I just realized I have done 'conversation crapping' a lot in real life, no wonder I struggle with social interactions. So, when someone tells me they love their new apple watch, if I'm not supposed to say 'I like my Fitbit watch because it does a lot of the same stuff while being gobs cheaper', what should I say? Just, 'oh cool tell me about it'? But that's not about ME, sighhhh, being a people is hard.
Click to expand...
I would think that your reply would be a valid response. However if you were to say "What an idiot for buying an Apple product instead of a Fitbit" then that would probably not be a good response.

I have seen similar things when someone posts something about their favorite TV shows. Some people reply saying things like "What a waste of time watching TV shows. I never have my TV on. I have things better to do with my life." That's fine if they feel that way but implying that they are superior over others because they don't watch TV is crapping on someone posting who wishes to share about something they enjoy. If they have no interest in TV shows why even comment on the post at all ?

Just my opinion on the subject.
 
This is actually too much "policing" for me. If I start a thread about how I love bacon wrapped scallops, and it turns into 75% of responses being about how bad bacon is for me, that's fine and I wouldn't consider it "derailing the discussion!" I wouldn't consider that thread crapping at all... it's what happens in forums. If there's too much "thread Nazi'ing" then it's not fun any longer. Of course direct name-calling or bona fide character attacks would be exempt.

But someone saying they like their Apple and others saying PCs are better... that's normal!
 
dilettante said:
Huh. I thought this was a discussion forum, not a gushin' forum.
Click to expand...
Yes. I wouldn't go to a Tom Cruise fan-forum and say that most of his movies bore me, but if someone started a thread here about actors, I might say that.

I think this comes down to the amount of control we think the person who started the thread has. Some start a thread and Immediately state rules right there in the opening post -- "Please no negativity," "Those who disagree may go elsewhere." Which surprises me because I think your control begins and ends with that opening post.

In other words, I feel like the OP gets to decide the subject of the thread, but not make rules about any of the posts that follow.
 
CallMeKate said:
This is actually too much "policing" for me. If I start a thread about how I love bacon wrapped scallops, and it turns into 75% of responses being about how bad bacon is for me, that's fine and I wouldn't consider it "derailing the discussion!" I wouldn't consider that thread crapping at all... it's what happens in forums. If there's too much "thread Nazi'ing" then it's not fun any longer. Of course direct name-calling or bona fide character attacks would be exempt.

But someone saying they like their Apple and others saying PCs are better... that's normal!
Click to expand...
Policing??? Just a definition of a particular internet behavior.
 
Nathan said:
Policing??? Just a definition of a particular internet behavior.
Click to expand...
Yes. If a thread is posted and for some reason it's "expected" that everyone agrees or doesn't post anything to the contrary, that's policing. You'd call it something different? We can't dictate how others respond to a post unless they are directly attacking us as an individual. Attacking something I post because they have a different view? That's what discussion forums are for... if everyone agrees, it would be really weird.

Your examples of Gay Pride Month and the 10 Commandments in Schools... were those posted without any realization that it would turn controversial? We know what's going to erupt on certain topics. If I start a topic on gun control, I'm not going to get all pi$$y when people give me their true feelings about it... I welcome it!

Your posted definition said "Coming into a thread titled "I love my new Apple Macintosh!", and posting "PCs are better and cheaper" is thread crapping." I don't agree. And if that OP comes back with "you can't say that on my thread about Applel" I consider it trying to police a thread and telling people how to respond. Which is really kind of like censorship when you think of it, isn't it? :unsure:
 
Last edited:
CallMeKate said:
Yes. If a thread is posted and for some reason it's "expected" that everyone agrees or doesn't post anything to the contrary, that's policing. You'd call it something different? We can't dictate how others respond to a post unless they are directly attacking us as an individual. Attacking something I post because they have a different view? That's what discussion forums are for... if everyone agrees, it would be really weird.

Your examples of Gay Pride Month and the 10 Commandments in Schools... were those seriously posted without any realization that it would turn controversial? We know what's going to erupt on certain topics. If I start a topic on gun control, I'm not going to get all pi$$y when people give me their true feelings about it... I welcome it!

Your posted definition said "Coming into a thread titled "I love my new Apple Macintosh!", and posting "PCs are better and cheaper" is thread crapping." I don't agree. And if that OP comes back with "you can't say that on my thread about Applel" I consider it trying to police a thread and telling people how to respond. Which is really kind of like censorship when you think of it, isn't it? :unsure:
Click to expand...
It appears that you are speaking to me, rather than a general "you", so I'll respond to your comment:
I consider it trying to police a thread and telling people how to respond. Which is really kind of like censorship when you think of it, isn't it?
Click to expand...


Sorry, I disagree. To me thread crapping is disrespectful, and what I would call being out-of-bounds socially. It takes the fun out of the social interaction, which is why people participate in online social media. I guess some people enjoy dissing strangers online, perhaps it gives them a sense of power or some dark pleasure.

Regarding "censorship" here is Britanica's definition of censorship:

Censorship
The changing or the suppression or prohibition of speech or writing that is deemed subversive of the common good. It occurs in all manifestations of authority to some degree, but in modern times it has been of special importance in its relation to government and the rule of law.
 
Nathan said:
Thread crapping

v. Thread crapping occurs when a person comes into a thread and posts something contrary to the spirit/intent of the thread, often derailing the discussion or turning it into an argument.
Coming into a thread titled "I love my new Apple Macintosh!", and posting "PCs are better and cheaper" is thread crapping.

Some have wondered why recent threads(Gay Pride Month and Louisiana Ten Commandments) were locked. Some people insist that they were merely expressing their "god given" rights to free speech. That's OK, if a thread is designed and intended to stimulate debate and attract differing points of view. However, some take the opportunity to express their negative thoughts and feelings, in total disregard and disrespect for the OP(original poster).
Thread crapping often becomes a form of harassment, being passive but aggressive, nonetheless.

This thread is not about my lifestyle, my favorite food, computer type or movie, so if you feel the need to exercise your First Amendment / god given right then you are more than welcome to comment....I won't be offended.
Click to expand...
superb post... I was very disappointed that my Ten commandments thread was so badly derailed that it ended with it being locked...
 
Pepper said:
Look, we all know specifically who you mean, @Nathan. I say we know him well enough by now & it's on us if we get all offended. Just let the guy speak his piece.
Click to expand...
perhaps he should make his own thread to ''speak his piece'' instead of derailing others... or is that a signal of a narcissist who had to have their attention on them all the time... regardless of who or what they upset !
 
The trouble is, "thread crapping" is a very common thing that happens to all sorts of conversations. Not only online threads, I'm talking about regular face-to-face conversations. It's a part of human nature. It is virtually impossible to start a conversation and expect all the responses to be right on subject, and/or stay within the spirit/intent of the original poster. To try to enforce this would end up with people being intimidated into silence.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top