Well, in THAT thread..............

[Shores]

Unless it is done to specifically call a poster out, "Well, Gahr, is this you said this, but now you say this", I think it can actually be a good angle on the conversation. It allows the posters to identify the factors that make the two situations different (or similar) and analyze why they have different opinions.

[jalutaja]

Unless it is done to specifically call a poster out, "Well, Gahr, is this you said this, but now you say this", I think it can actually be a good angle on the conversation. It allows the posters to identify the factors that make the two situations different (or similar) and analyze why they have different opinions.

+1

I also think that these can be honest attempts to understand and learning experiences.

To make an hypothetical example:

Jalutaja: "But, Shores, in previous thread you said the white shoes were OK by etiquette, but today you insist that they are not! I am confused."

Shores: "Dear Jalutaja, the previous threadhappened before the labor day and now it is past the labor day, so people following the Western upper class etiquette have packed away their white shoes."

Jalutaja: "Thank you for explaining it for me! I had completely forgotten the labor day rule!"

[567Kate]

I think it can be useful sometimes. "OP, a similar thread came up last year, and you may find some of the responses useful."

I'll admit to being annoyed when it's used to back up one's point using a thread that's related, but not quite the same. "Well, on this other thread last month, everyone agreed that..." I get annoyed particularly when the person is trying to point out inconsistent responses (from the forum; not one person) when, as many of you have pointed out, the two threads might have completely different posters. We are not the etiquette Borg!

[Steve]

what?! we are NOT Etiquette of Borg?

[DuBois]

I'm 100% with you on this, Gahr.  Drives me absolutely crazy for all the reasons you mentioned. 

I used to try to point out the differences in threads, explain that different posters might be involved, or note that claims a poster is making (e.g., if they say a thread had a "consensus" when it clearly didn't) but I learned that goes absolutely nowhere. 

I'm trying harder to just completely ignore a post that begins with "Well, in this other thread, posters agreed..." because replying just makes it worse and turns the *new* thread into a debate about what was actually said in the previous thread.

Oh, I'd forgotten that one! You're right, people sometimes talk about a 'consensus' when in fact the thread was quite divided, or there was a distinct and vocal minority.

[Fluffy Cat]

Unless it is done to specifically call a poster out, "Well, Gahr, is this you said this, but now you say this", I think it can actually be a good angle on the conversation. It allows the posters to identify the factors that make the two situations different (or similar) and analyze why they have different opinions.

I had this done to me once and it genuinely made me re-examine my position for a double standard.  It can be helpful.

[DuBois]

Unless it is done to specifically call a poster out, "Well, Gahr, is this you said this, but now you say this", I think it can actually be a good angle on the conversation. It allows the posters to identify the factors that make the two situations different (or similar) and analyze why they have different opinions.

I had this done to me once and it genuinely made me re-examine my position for a double standard.  It can be helpful.

I suppose it can be, though I think it would be more likely to make me think that the person is trying to catch me out. I can't imagine remembering who said what to that extent, I don't think.

[Lynn2000]

Interesting question. I've not really noticed this myself, perhaps because I don't really go back and read the "other threads" people link to. I'm way too lazy for that.

But, I think a good way to handle it, if one feels it's being "thrown" at them by another poster, would be to elucidate why they think the two threads are in fact different, and then let the other poster say why they think they're similar (or vice versa). One person might feel the differences are superficial, another might feel they're at the core of the issue, and that could be a way to give both people (and everyone reading it) a new perspective on the situation.

But, I admit it would be very frustrating at first, if the similarities or differences seem very self-evident to one person, or if they feel the debate between threads is distracting from the main issue.

[Fluffy Cat]

Unless it is done to specifically call a poster out, "Well, Gahr, is this you said this, but now you say this", I think it can actually be a good angle on the conversation. It allows the posters to identify the factors that make the two situations different (or similar) and analyze why they have different opinions.

I had this done to me once and it genuinely made me re-examine my position for a double standard.  It can be helpful.

I suppose it can be, though I think it would be more likely to make me think that the person is trying to catch me out. I can't imagine remembering who said what to that extent, I don't think.

In my case, it wasn't specifically directed at me, but it was directed at my posts (and everyone else with the same perspective).  It was comparing a thread about messy toddler eating in public (I didn't like it) and a thread about dogs eating in a restaurant (I didn't mind at all).  It made me realize that I was unintentionally treating two similar situations (in most ways) differently based on my personal preferences rather than an objective standard.  It made me re-think my position.

[furrcats]

what?! we are NOT Etiquette of Borg?

You won the thread