# Suggestion regarding h*lm*t debates



## CopperBrompton (26 Oct 2009)

Seeing yet another thread hijacked by a pointless helmet debate, could I suggest a policy where this recurring argument is banned from any thread other than one where helmets are the actual topic?


----------



## Fab Foodie (27 Oct 2009)

Ben Lovejoy said:


> Seeing yet another thread hijacked by a pointless helmet debate, could I suggest a policy where this recurring argument is banned from any thread other than one where helmets are the actual topic?



Agreed.


----------



## Shaun (27 Oct 2009)

Can I suggest that if a thread gets hijakced for this or any other topic, someone just reports one of the posts (_red triangle on the left_) and explains what has happened.

Me and the mods can then deal with it; either by separating the off-topic content into a new thread of it's own, or by removing the posts.

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## TheDoctor (27 Oct 2009)

You can also flag a thread for faulty spelling.
Even if it's a difficult word, such as 'hijacked'...

*awaits short ban*


----------



## Shaun (27 Oct 2009)

TheDoctor said:


> You can also flag a thread for faulty spelling.
> Even if it's a difficult word, such as 'hijacked'...
> 
> *awaits short ban*



It's late, I'm treid ... that's my excuce and I'm slicking to it.


----------



## CopperBrompton (27 Oct 2009)

They'res no excoose four speling misstakes


----------



## Arch (29 Oct 2009)

Ben Lovejoy said:


> Seeing yet another thread hijacked by a pointless helmet debate, could I suggest a policy where this recurring argument is banned from any thread other than one where helmets are the actual topic?



I can see the point, but how do you distinguish whether helmets are the topic? If someone asks what they need to budget for as well as a bike, and someone says "a helmet", is that on topic or not? Or if someone askes which helemt to get, and someone goes off on one about them, then it's sort of on topic, but not helpful..

Best to report as Admin says, and then let the Mods decide, rather than have an inflexible rule.


----------



## CopperBrompton (29 Oct 2009)

Some cases might be ambiguous, but a thread on lighting ... or gearing ... or waterproof jackets or ...

It was just an idea aimed at prevention rather than cure.


----------



## dellzeqq (30 Oct 2009)

Can we have helmet given the asterisk treatment like ****, **** and piss?

(2 out of 3 ain't bad...)


----------



## very-near (30 Oct 2009)

I suggest using a mod with a neutral viewpoint to oversee the thread.

MrP wears a cycling helmet, but isn't convinced they actually work, so I'd say he is well qualified for the task


----------



## srw (31 Oct 2009)

If we do this for helmet wars, can we do the same for the endless threads that get hijacked by people defending off-road drivers, speeders and climate change deniers?

Pretty please?


----------



## CopperBrompton (31 Oct 2009)

Examples of such hijacked threads?


----------



## CopperBrompton (31 Oct 2009)

At which threads?


----------



## CopperBrompton (31 Oct 2009)

> There are only two pages.


Indeed, and it didn't apply to any of the ones I sampled, so it doesn't exactly appear to be a daily occurence.


----------



## srw (31 Oct 2009)

Most of the helmet hijacks stay where they are. Most of the offroad, speeding and climate change denial hijacks do the same - and most of them involve the same person. Who, coincidentally, seems to be trying to hijack this thread. It's a very rare thread that gets into Room 101.


----------



## Norm (31 Oct 2009)

srw said:


> If we do this for helmet wars, can we do the same for the endless threads that get hijacked by people defending off-road drivers, speeders and climate change deniers?
> 
> Pretty please?


Yes... if we can do the same with thoughtless pigeon-holing of everyone who has a 4x4, motorbike etc.


----------



## Shaun (1 Nov 2009)

Can I suggest we stick to constructive *feedback* please.

Thanks,
Shaun


----------



## Fab Foodie (3 Nov 2009)

Admin said:


> Can I suggest we stick to constructive *feedback* please.
> 
> Thanks,
> Shaun


Why? We could go to yacf for that


----------



## HJ (6 Nov 2009)

Admin said:


> Can I suggest that if a thread gets hijakced for this or any other topic, someone just reports one of the posts (_red triangle on the left_) and explains what has happened.
> 
> _Me and the mods _can then deal with it; either by separating the off-topic content into a new thread of it's own, or by removing the posts.
> 
> ...



Sorry but shouldn't that be "the mods and I", ops sorry hijacking the thread to complain about poor grammar


----------



## HJ (6 Nov 2009)

Norm said:


> Yes... if we can do the same with thoughtless pigeon-holing of everyone who has a 4x4, motorbike etc.



Now there is a good idea...


----------



## montage (7 Nov 2009)

Helmets save your life but make you got bald in patches.

Disscuss.


----------



## PpPete (7 Nov 2009)

Montage, that's utter nonsense, surely everyone knows that helmets rot your brian and shtop u spullin korrectly?


----------



## montage (11 Nov 2009)

I heard that Helmets are the best protection out there. I've slept with many many girls while wearing one, and so far none of them are pregnent.


----------



## Theseus (12 Nov 2009)

montage said:


> I heard that Helmets are the best protection out there. I've slept with many many girls while wearing one, and so far none of them are pregnent.



I bet you didn't sleep with the girl that posted this ad.


----------

