On Wednesday 16 September 2020 11:44:13 Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote:
> Anno domini 2020 Wed, 16 Sep 11:10:00 -0700
>
>  William Morder via trinity-users via tde-users scripsit:
> > [...]
> >
> > > (Personally, I like to see a little personal banter and joking; it
> > > helps one get to know the folks we're communicating with.  It does go a
> > > bit too far sometimes, but for me it only becomes irritating when these
> > > two problems are combined -- page after page after page of untrimmed,
> > > now-irrelevant quotes many levels deep, scrolling, scrolling,
> > > scrolling, just to find a line or two of something completely
> > > irrelevant at the bottom.)
> >
> > I can live with that. My problem is always, where to start revising or
> > cutting what others have said.
> >
> > And when the original topic (say, about installing Icecat) suddenly veers
> > into philosophy and politics and Big Brother, etc., this really ought to
> > be turned into a completely new, separate thread. It's interesting,
> > sometimes, but the original topic got lost in discussions of matters that
> > were several steps removed from where it started.
> >
> > So what would be our rule? except to create a new thread, early on, once
> > we realize where this train wreck is headed.
>
> @ topposting: https://habr.com/ru/post/13714/
> @ rules: rules are there to be broken. The more the world drifts to law &
> order, the more imporant that gets.
>
> Nik
>

I also agree with this position, but only because I am feeling very agreeable 
today. I don't know about *rules*, but at least guidelines, signposts, 
guardrails, some sort of official notice that says, for example, 

DANGER!   BRIDGE OUT!
BOTTOMLESS ABYSS AHEAD

But I am also against rules that are too rigid and unyielding, as that is both 
inhuman and inhumane. 

Bill