nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Thread/Discussion Protocol

Smiling Sam

This thread was created simply to keep from diverting from the subject of Cathy's original thread about India and Nepal where the discussion was evolving.

This discussion is not related to the original subject, Nepal and India, so I decided to start a new thread.

Sealord - in a general sense I agree with your post in the Northern India & Nepal thread, especially the part about no one 'owns' a thread. Posts within a thread often spark side discussions. For me, as long as they are generally about the original subject, tour, area of the world, etc. then I'm perfectly good with some diversion from the original post.

If they start to go a completely different route (like your example of the Eiffel Tower) then a new thread probably should be started.

I know I've probably been guilty of joining in on some diversions, maybe even starting one. I think it's easy to get caught up in or even start a diversion.

As an example, someone might be posting a daily log of the trip that they are currently on. During that process they post a picture or make a comment that triggers a memory, that leads to a post that may start a diversion thread, with no malicious intent.

Let's say in a persons daily trip report they talk about or post a picture of a meal they've had. It triggers a memory of a similar meal that you've had on the same trip or a totally different trip. A person decides to post related information based on that memory of their meal. Before you know it the thread explodes with discussion of meals, foods, etc. to the point that the daily log of the trip that started the thread gets lost in a discussion of meals, foods, etc.

I'm not saying whether this is good or bad, it's just so easy to do. It's kind of like the ebb and flow of a conversation between multiple people. They rarely stick to a single subject.

That said, personally I would hope that diversions are brief. If more detailed discussion is desired then I'd prefer to see a new thread started.

Comments

Claudia Sails

Concur Sam. To me the biggest issue is that useful info ends up in a thread someone wouldn't be looking in. That's why its better to begin a different thread.

I don't think anyone has malicious or even rude intentions if the threads gets off track.

Further its up to Tauck to make and enforce any rules.

kfnknfzk

I partially agree with you, Smiling Sam. I have certainly diverged from a topic and will make a concerted effort to not do that in the future. What I am adamant about is not taking another individual's review that is in progress and turning it into my own discussion of another trip and then posting multiple pictures of my unrelated trip.

There already are guidelines about posting. "Don't disrupt a discussion in progress" and "Don't use derogatory language." Frankly, I find those two guidelines to be common sense and guidelines that require no further explanation.

I am far more concerned about the name calling and outright vitriol that permeates some of these threads and the fact that some individuals seem to take delight in being malicious. The guilty ones will always deny their behavior, which is why I wish Tauck monitored this forum. To be able to look within oneself is a remarkable trait to have and one that I certainly can benefit from, too.

I respectfully disagree with the statement that it is Tauck's responsibility to make and enforce rules. I listed two of their guidelines above. Because Tauck does not enforce their guidelines regularly means it is acceptable to not adhere to them? My question is rhetorical.

I applaud you, Smiling Sam, for your very insightful post and for keeping it objective and professional. Thank you.

Sealord

I am copying my original post here since we have a new thread. This is what ‘Sam’ was responding about:

I had to review the Tauck policies relative to the forum in order to get my head straight on this. The person who starts a particular thread here does not ‘own’ it. If someone wants a private blog, they need to start a private blog. Reviewing one trip is exactly that, and one can experience a variety of different things on the same ‘trip’. We have done three K&T’s for example, and they were all dramatically different. Mil for example did the Z,B, & SA trip in what I would call the ‘dry’ season … Victoria Falls and the Zambezi were a trickle compared to other seasons, and the Okavango appeared quite dry also. Others asked questions about that, and ‘others’ posted some pictures that showed the region during wet conditions. In short, no one owns the thread, and anyone is free to post observations and related photographs. If you are in Africa, pictures taken at the Eiffel Tower might not be appropriate, but I don’t think I’m being that obtuse.

BSP51

Why does “legal” even need to be brought up when we are all posting travel information. For god’s sake why do we take ourselves so seriously?

kfnknfzk

BSP51 -

My reason for my post was to let Sealord know that a post does have ownership and that the ownership is legally binding. That's all. Since my intention was not to start a diversion, I will remove it. I apologize that the word "legal" bothered you. I do stand firm, however, about the animosity that exists at times.

BSP51

Kfnknfzk. - I’m not an attorney. Just a humble retired shoe salesman. I would have thought it would fall under freedom of speech but you seem to know the law much better than I do.

kfnknfzk

BSP51 - I was not challenging Sealord's freedom of speech. He stated numerous times that one does not "own" a post. I, in good faith, commented that there is ownership and that the ownership is legally binding. I honestly do not know what the issue is. Is there more to it than that? Please send me a private message if you would like.

Smiling Sam - A perfect example of how the intent of a post gets sidetracked. I have apologized, but it appears to be of no avail. I apologize to you if my good intentions led to this. I will wait a bit to see that you have seen this, then I will delete my posts, excluding my first one.

BSP51

No problem. No need to delete.

Sealord

I don’t argue on this venue. If you disagree you are welcome to your own opinion.

kfnknfzk

No one is arguing or disagreeing. I give up.

mil

Smiling Sam

Kfnknfzk - no need to delete anything. I consider all posts in this thread to be closely related to my original post. They are examples of how a conversation ebbs and flows as things motivate individuals to offer further commentary. My post wasn’t an ongoing, day to day type of post, it was done to try to be a thread about how or why a discussion thread might occasionally diverge, as participants interests are motivated.

Now if, as Sealord stated, the discussion moves towards the Eiffel Tower, then perhaps a new thread would be warranted.

I guess what I’m saying is that small diversions or perturbations near the theme of the original post are a natural part of a discussion.

That could be a central point:
1) is any given thread an individual’s “blog” (like that person’s trip report) where they aren’t looking for discussion that could lead to diversion from their report or
2) an initiation of a conversation with other forum members seeking interactions, opinions, experiences from other forum members

People thinking they have created a thread of Type 1, could feel “their thread” has been stolen if it diverges.

People thinking they have created a thread of Type 2, likely welcome all input not knowing where the thread discussion may go.

Some of the angst that has popped up could be related people’s perception of the two thread types. The forum itself doesn’t distinguish or indicate which thread type a user is trying to or is thinking they are creating. When the thread goes opposite to people’s perception of why a thread was created creates the angst.

Just some thoughts.

I welcome all comments, ideas, suggestions about the differing opinions about the operation of forum threads. 😀

Claudia Sails

Great post Chris.

I'll stick to my view that it's up to Tauck to set the rules and enforce them which they can do so by deleting a post, a thread or ultimately an acct. Users can only do that for their own posts. I have no control over what others do NOR should I have.

Here's an idea. If you don't like what someone else posts you always have the option to ignore it and move along. This is especially so for posts involving personal views vs erroneous information. Example: I said in another thread I didn't recommend either the Ritz or the Intercontinental hotels in Lisbon because I got tired of the very steep uphill walk to them from the nearest metro stop in Pompal circle. I did not say the hotels.were located in Belem which would have been totally erroneous and someone would be justified in correcting me.

Smiling Sam

Cathy - It can be frustrating when a thread you've created diverges from your original subject. I can see how it could easily happen in the case you described. You might have posted a picture of penguins and or an ice floe and those pictures triggered a memory for one of the viewers of your post.

That triggered memory, then got the viewer to post pictures of when they saw penguins or an ice flow, albeit on the Patagonia tour. This is classic thread divergence.

It can be frustrating, but one possible way to look at it could be that your post was so good that it stimulated memories in other forum viewers to the point they felt compelled to post similar pictures.

Another response could be when you see a divergence that could likely be more appropriately posted to a different area (in the case you cited in the Patagonia area of the forum) that you post a response like, "Your pictures are wonderful but don't you think it would be better if they were posted in the Patagonia area instead of the Antarctica area. Doing that would help people looking for information on Patagonia tours, whereas they might miss it if you post the lovely pictures in the Antarctica section.

I know that seems like a pain, but it will remind people that there are forum sections for every tour and that posting the information in the most appropriate tour area is a help to all forum users that are trying to get information for a tour that they are thinking of taking.

Posts made in the General forum area or, like this thread, in the Travel Forum Guidelines area could posts that have a wide diversity.

One guideline for responders in a thread might be if a thread is created in the area of a specific tour then try to keep the responses to specifics of that tour.

As an example, I recently created a thread for the Egypt: Jewels of the Nile tour that I posted to during and after my tour in October. There were lots and lots of great responses. In addition, BKMD who is just completing the same tour just continued the same thread for his tour (since both tours were done within a month of each other).

Posts of comments about things you might have experienced on this tour at some other date all could be useful information to forum readers looking to get information about this tour.

In addition, people that took the Jordan&Egypt tour possibly would have useful insights to post in the thread as well since the Egypt portion of tour was almost identical to the Jewels of the Nile tour. Now if those people started posting comments about the Jordan portion of their tour then they might be more appropriately placed in the Jordan&Egypt tour area of the forum because that information wouldn't be pertinent to people looking in the Egypt: Jewels of the Nile tour area of the forum.

And clearly information about the Israel & Jordan tour, even though that tour is very close geographically to the Egypt: Jewels of the Nile area, would be more appropriately place int eh Israel & Jordan tour area of the forum.

Short little references to other tours could be appropriate to help explain something, but posting a series of photos of a completely different tour probably should be done in that tour's area of the forum - even if the subject matter is similar.

As an example of similar subject matter. Let's say someone that went on the Israel & Jordan tour or the Jordan and Egypt tour posted pictures of the Roman Ruins of Jerash. I would say it wouldn't be appropriate for someone to post pictures of the Roman Ruins of Ephesus just because both are about Roman Ruins. A short textual reference to the Ephesus ruins might be appropriate to help explain something. The Ephesus pictures are more valuable when posted in the tour's area that actually included Ephesus.

This post is just to make people think about how thread divergence can happen and get people to think about which area of the forum is the best place to make their posts. Especially if they are going to post a series of pictures. Pictures are very useful for a reader trying to get information about a tour they are thinking of taking, but only if those pictures are placed in the forum area for the tour that the pictures are about.