Showing Disapproval - Beating The Dead Horse

[Abraham]

The posting of the "Beating the Dead Horse icon or symbol of whatever it is... to express disapproval of a thread, is to me at least, a display of extreme pettiness.

If we don't care for a particular subject, why not just move on rather than show contempt? No one forces anyone to read what OTHERS may care to discuss.

What are your thoughts regarding this subject?

[KC5AV]

A lot of times (not always) this comes in threads started by new members of the forum. Many of these threads could be reduced by new members using the search function.

[Oldgringo]

Since you asked:

Flogging a dead horse (alternatively beating a dead horse in some parts of the Anglophone world) is an idiom that means a particular request or line of conversation is already foreclosed or otherwise resolved, and any attempt to continue it is futile; or that to continue in any endeavour (physical, mental, etc.) is a waste of time as the outcome is already decided.

Otherwise, you may be right.

[olafpfj]

The posting of the "Beating the Dead Horse icon or symbol of whatever it is... to express disapproval of a thread, is to me at least, a display of extreme pettiness.

If we don't care for a particular subject, why not just move on rather than show contempt? No one forces anyone to read what OTHERS may care to discuss.

What are your thoughts regarding this subject?

I'm finding myself very much liking how things are dealt with on this site. Brilliant reading.

http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/for ... y.php?f=98" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[USA1]

What are your thoughts regarding this subject?

Personally, I find it a little rude in most cases I have seen it used....but that's just me.
As mentioned above, If I don't care for a statement or subject, or if it has been rehashed
multiple times I just move along to something else.

For the record..I have never used it.

[speedsix]

...there is a difference between posting a different opinion and arguing with someone about theirs and being rude, insulting, or "superior" by making comments or posting little pics showing disapproval...I think it's much better to post a link referring them to the previous thread(s)...and then go on with life and simply don't go back to the thread...let it die a natural death...different isn't always wrong...I've learned a lot here from both old and new posters and views...no need to be unpleasant...just move on...

[The Annoyed Man]

What are your thoughts regarding this subject?

Personally, I find it a little rude in most cases I have seen it used....but that's just me.
As mentioned above, If I don't care for a statement or subject, or if it has been rehashed
multiple times I just move along to something else.

For the record..I have never used it.

I've used it twice. The first time was in the latest and most recent "open carry" thread (when there were like three other active threads on the topic at the time). The second was in a PM to someone as a joke. I can't tell you his name, but his initials are "Abraham."

[Abraham]

As far as I know, a search function doesn't fall into an implied "prerequisite" to topic discussion, nor should it be.

While I see providing a link to the subject, whatever it may be, as helpful, those wishing to discuss it anew has merit too.

If anyone feels a need to roll their eyes with an attitude that says "oh brother, not this again", they can simply move on without throwing cold water on those who wish to visit a topic they have interest in.

[terryg]

The posting of the "Beating the Dead Horse icon or symbol of whatever it is... to express disapproval of a thread, is to me at least, a display of extreme pettiness.

If we don't care for a particular subject, why not just move on rather than show contempt? No one forces anyone to read what OTHERS may care to discuss.

What are your thoughts regarding this subject?

[]

I couldn't agree more. Generally accepted forum protocol in most places does encourage a search before posting a new topic. However, this is not always successful because of a common search term. Sometimes also, information and consensus about a given subject is very fluid and a dated posting can hold little relevance. But this only tells part of the story.

On this forum, I have seen these actions (with and without their respective emoticons: , , etc.) used primarily in three situations:

1. A friendly tongue-in-cheek jab toward a known forum member - ie a friend. These have been pretty rare and usually no offence is intended or taken from this action.

2. Posted when a new member ask one of the dozens of otherwise commonly asked questions. While the OP may have violated typical forum conventions by not searching first; this is still an extremely unwelcoming response to a new member. As has been stated, there are other, more polite ways, to let a new member know that a topic has been discussed before.

3. But by far, this is most frequently done in an effort to squelch a discussion that someone feels has already been hashed out. But in addition to being very rude (and IMO border on violating forum rules and general decorum), the 'dead horse' or 'roll eyes' poster cannot be certain the the current discussion is not exploring previously unresolved aspects of a particular topic.

A healthy discussion/debate between parties who may be on opposite ends of a particular topic will explore lots of different aspects of that topic. In the process, they will be able to find points of common ground and should be able to find the primary points of contention. This should NOT be confused with un-purposed bickering that has no redeeming value. When properly executed, both parties will walk away with, at a minimum, a better understanding of the opposing viewpoint. One or both may also walk away with a slightly altered position. This is healthy and should not be discouraged.

As I mentioned in another thread, rolling eyes is rude/disrespectful behavior that I have worked to eliminate from my teenage daughters. I do not want them rolling their eyes at me or any one else. It should be seen for what it is on this forum as well - rude and disrespectful.

[/]

[USA1]

Well said Terry.

[KaiserB]

Faster Moderators could help eliminate the NEW threads based on the same old questions that provoke the beating of a dead horse.

Just consolidate or lock threads that are repetitive. You could always do like the Enos board and post a link with the search demonstrating 32 other topics of the same nature.

Such as: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=site%3Atexaschlfor ... +office%22" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Alternately you could get one of these keyboards for your computer: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20029684-1.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; It does not have a "dead horse" key though.





[this message and the information contained herein should be taken in jest]

[philip964]

The dead horse symbol is many times amusing, I guess it depends on whether you wrote the original post or are just reading. The most effective use is when you post it after your own post. For example: Should I carry my Glock Israel Style?

[WildBill]

As with all written communication, sometimes it is difficult to determine whether or not certain statements should be taken seriously, as a joke, as sarcasm or as tongue-in-cheek. In other words, things should be taken in context. So using the icons for beating a dead horse or rolling ones eyes are not neccesarily rude. I have tried not to be rude, but I have used these and other icons to express my feelings about certain subjects.

Terryg had some excellent points in his post. Nothing gets my goat so much as a child [teenager] as rolling their eyeballs. Especially, if it is concurrant with them saying, "Whatever!". But consider these two posts:

As usual, Abraham is asking another of his thought-provoking questions.

At the local gunshop I heard the owner tell a customer, "If you shoot him outside, drag him into the house.

I agree that the first use of the is rude. The second example may be rude, but I think that is an appropriate response for such an asinine statement.

Getting back to the dead horse, I think that using it when a junior member asks the questions "What Do You Think about a CHL Badge" or "What Do You Think about Carrying Blanks" is rude and not appropriate.

On the other hand I have used it for threads that go on ad naseum, and offer no new information or original thoughts.
Yes, I could ignore the thread and move on, but a icon might stimulate some members to get the thread back on track and post something that is constructive.

Where is that soapbox icon when I need it?

[Abraham]

KaiserB,

terryg posted some very cogent reasons for re-visiting a topic.

For me, this is one of the more compelling: "...information and consensus about a given subject is very fluid and a dated posting can hold little relevance."

I think, at times, there may be a knee-jerk reaction to a topic as being redundant, producing sighs in those who wish the subject would simply go away, and for reasons beyond my ken, they can't simply move on, but feel a need to chastise - when in fact the interested parties wish to discuss it.

What's the harm in letting people discuss a previously discussed topic even if an extremely small minority get bug-eyed at the prospect?

P.S. Their vision malady is self-induced, as they could just as well skip the thread entirely with no harm and no foul for anyone.

P.P.S. For those who can't stand topics discussed more than a few times, I have some tri-cornered hats they may be interested in...

[terryg]

Terryg had some excellent points in his post. Nothing gets my goat so much as a child [teenager] as rolling their eyeballs. Especially, if it is concurrant with them saying, "Whatever!". But consider these two posts:

As usual, Abraham is asking another of his thought-provoking questions.

At the local gunshop I heard the owner tell a customer, "If you shoot him outside, drag him into the house.

I agree that the first use of the is rude. The second example may be rude, but I think that is an appropriate response for such an asinine statement.

Excellent post and great example WildBill. Of course, if the gunshop owner happened to be a member of the forum and could discern that he was the subject, he might also be offended. But all and all, I agree that the first would be rude while the second would not be and would be an effective and appropriate usage of the emoticon.

Getting back to the dead horse, I think that using it when a junior member asks the questions "What Do You Think about a CHL Badge" or "What Do You Think about Carrying Blanks" is rude and not appropriate.

On the other hand I have used it for threads that go on ad naseum, and offer no new information or original thoughts.
Yes, I could ignore the thread and move on, but a icon might stimulate some members to get the thread back on track.

Where is that soapbox icon when I need it?

I can see that logic, but this usage is still troubling to me. I guess it is because the point at which a topic turns from productive to stagnant (i.e. ad naseum) is so subjective. And, the dead horse icon is never really used on threads where everyone is in agreement. So it is really only on threads with confilicting viewpoints that the dead horse is posted. And I guess, I have a greater tolerance than many for discussion and debate so I find myself and my threads are a common target for the deadhorse icon being used as a cease and desist order.

And here is the kicker: There have been a few threads that have continued well past the point that some found to be never-ending that we eventually found common ground and discovered the primary points of contention. And it has been these threads (at some points contentious but courteous), much more so than the standard threads, that have helped shape my changing opinions over the past several months.

So from my perspective, such actions - while aimed to reduce perceived unresolvable conflict - actually only prolong the conflict.