Code of Conduct revision request.

[Bealman]

Yes, I think that a lot of new members put their first posts there simply because they think it's the right thing to do.

[grumbeast]

Can't say I'm in favour if the change.  I was involved in the listed building slight diversion.  To me it seemed like a pertinent and interesting diversion.  these, lets face it, slight and related sidebars, often yield interesting content.  I get that some people don't like them, but I've yet to see a thread where the OP has asked for things to return to topic where it hasn't immediately happened.  If people have to start being careful about what they say in a reply as whether it is on topic or not then a lot of people just aren't going to reply at all for fear of breaking the rules. 

I really like the light touch moderation here, and the OP has the right to ask for their thread to be kept tight if that's what they want.  An overarching rule would just restrict the forum for the benefit of a personal preference.

[OffshoreAlan]

Thanks folks for some interesting replies (and apologies if any ruffled feathers). 

I'm all in favour of light touch moderation, which I think would counter some of the objections to my suggestion since I would expect a similar approach to be taken with my new rule.

I take the point also about the OP being able to lay down ground rules (preferences really) for a topic.

I admit the example I chose to illustrate my rant was not the most pertinent offender given some other examples around 

And yes, obviously "on or off topic" will always be a subjective judgement.

So thanks again for this lively little discussion, I guess status quo wins in the end 





P.S. One thing I love about this Forum is the complete absence of insults and rudeness such as occurs on some other forums - this generates a friendly tone much welcomed. 

[njee20]

I'm all in favour of light touch moderation, which I think would counter some of the objections to my suggestion since I would expect a similar approach to be taken with my new rule.

So you want a new rule that isn't enforced...? I think you're right, let's leave it as is

[GlenEglise]

I'm all in favour of light touch moderation, which I think would counter some of the objections to my suggestion since I would expect a similar approach to be taken with my new rule.

So you want a new rule that isn't enforced...? I think you're right, let's leave it as is

Don't think he quite said that, all he said was for it to be policed with a light touch.

[njee20]

What's the difference? He's saying he wants the forum rules changed to keep threads on topic, but then says he hopes it'd be loosely enforced? Isn't that what we have? I've seen moderator comments regarding keeping things on topic. wheb it irritates me is when it gets into some in joke or something by a handful of posters. When the topic naturally meanders it tends to come back to the original topic at some point.

Still, I'm still amused by your outburst on the F1 thread, because people were deigning to talk about non N gauge matters, in the area of the forum specifically dedicated to off topic chat... at least we know your stance on the matter!

[RailGooner]

I note that the Code of Conduct does not include any reference to staying on topic in a thread (other forums I use do have this rule).

Would it be possible to add this rule, and ensure it is adhered to (the other forums admittedly are not always very diligent in this respect).

If you need to comment on an entry which goes off topic (a not uncommon occurrence) then the best way to tackle it IMHO is to start a new topic appropriately headed and include in your first post a link to the topic which inspired it - a technique I've used many times on other forums, and demonstrate in the following paragraph – where I've started a new topic here instead of posting on the York Railway Station & the National Rail Museum topic.

This post has a risen as a result of my frustration with the York Railway Station & the National Rail Museum (see https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=55247.msg734855#msg734855 ) topic which was originally fairly short and very rich in interesting material about the subject. It has now wandered off into a topic about Listed Buildings in the Railway Network, with the potential to dilute the original interesting (to me) topic with loads of debris about a topic which is of little interest (to me).

Another farcical example of this trait is the Code of Conduct topic itself which a quick check just revealed currently a discussion on board materials (this occurring round about entry number 500 – I ask you, over 500 responses on Rules of Conduct, it beggars belief) – and who would ever be drawn to it when encountering board material issues, "oh I've got a problem with board materials, I'll look in the Site Rules topic".  (yes, I do know about the Search facility).

I admit I'm biased because I hate long meandering threads, with several obvious exceptions of course - horses for courses.

To a lesser extent I would also make a plea to avoid entries like "great thread" etc., there is a rating system available where you can express your appreciation – use it, don't clutter the Topic.  If these two modifications were implemented it would reduce the York Station Topic by about 30%, leaving only those totally relevant to the topic.

I hope I'm not sounding too like Victor Meldrew 

[End of Rant.]

What do other members think ?

Since you ask what I think... I think you picked a terrible example in the York Railway Station & the National Rail Museum thread - a thread about a listed building that goes off-topic by discussing other listed buildings?! Really?! Makes you sound like Victor Meldrew.

[snitchthebudgie]

Treads go off topic?  Never!!!!!