Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Forum Guidelines Working Group

One thing I do hate...:) When there is a long discusion going on and then I write something...and then...the discusion ends. I hate being a discussion stopper!

Thanks so much lucounu - that's puts it perfectly!
You've given me lots to smile about today and I am grateful.

Where else in my life can I have a 'half-baked' thought and get such wonderful, and funny, help getting it all the way baked? No where?

YES! Go GIDF! Go lucounu!
Grinity

I like it here since we're not anti- or pro- anything in particular on this forum, except anti-pushing a single point of view. We are open to any and all suggestions and ideas, because what works for one person may well work for another.

I thoroughly loved this forum! The advice that I've gotten whether in response to my own posts / PMs, or from simply reading others' posts have helped us in understanding our children and advocating for them in a more effective way.

Grinity, I don't get that 'pro-skipping flavor' either. If anything, it helps me to understand that skipping is really a viable alternative and it's not that scary since so many of you have done it successfully. Even though we decided not to grade-skip our DS as he starts middle school this fall, I don't ever feel pressured in any way by anyone in this forum.

In regards to why some of us may not post as much anymore, a simple reason may be because we've gotten the advice we needed and we're in a pretty good place right now. That doesn't mean we don't still love this forum. I still read it every day as part of my daily reading. I remember when the board was out for a weekend (for maintenance?) a couple months ago, I felt totally 'out-of-balance' and I kept checking to see if it's online yet...

!

Great point Sydness....I can definitely relate to that!

I suspect though that while some of us come out of those situations feeling like every other injury pales in comparison, others come out feeling more fragile and may be more impacted by a shoot-from-the-hip style. I'm not suggesting we walk on egg shells (I like the mix of styles and personalities), I'm just acknowledging that for some newcomers walking into some of the more contentious threads might not feel too different from those RL meetings.

The moderator can terminate a thread that he thinks is hurting the forum, but that is a blunt instrument. I wonder if it is technically feasible to "demote" a thread so that it no longer shows up in the "Recent Posts" sidebar. Interested members would still be able to find the thread, but it would be less prominent. The moderator can also warn people that a thread is becoming too acrimonious without terminating it. On some forums the moderator deletes an entire thread when he dislikes some messages. I oppose that approach. Even acrimonious threads have some information content, both about the subjects discussed and the personalities of the discussants.

I am going to re-ask a question I posed a few pages back since I didn't see any feedback. Hopefully I'll be more coherent or you all will unhide it so I get some responses.

There was mention of not derailing threads being a potential part of the guidelines. I can see that working one of two ways and want to know what is being suggested.

Way #1:

Amy (made up name) posts a thread about her ds' WISC scores and asks for feedback. Mary (another made up name) chimes in to list her dd's WISC scores and also asks for what she should do.

Typically referred to "hijacking"

Way #2:

Amy posts a thread about her ds' WISC scores and asks for feedback. People give her the feedback she requests and it brings up comments about kids with low WMI. The conversation morphs into a discussion of what the WMI on the WISC is actually measuring and then to a discussion of grade acceleration and 504 plans (Amy isn't thinking of grade skipping her kid) and whether a child who needs significant accommodations to perform at a higher grade should skip and....

Do you all want to actively limit the second type of diversion or just the first or neither or both?

Hi Cricket2,
I think that neither of those 2 examples is part of the problem, and would reserve threadjacking as an expression where the 'tone' of the thread changes from an 'I don't know what my child needs' tone to a 'let's debate the pros and cons of X parenting ideal.' I think this needs to be stated better than I'm stating it, but basically I sure would prefer if new folks started their own thread, because sometimes I get confused and misanswer, but I dont' think it's worth making it a rule.

I think that the longer the thread goes on the harder it is for me to muster the enthusiasm to go back and read it closely.

So I would encourage folks to start new thread often -and it's fine to leave a pointer post to the new thread. But what I am trying to say is that the minute someone's personal vulnerability gets turned into a 'let's spar' sort of debate over parenting approaches, I'm going to feel uncomfortable in a way that starting a side thread would totally avoid. If folks want to talk about 'Does family bed create cranky children?' that's fine, but if Mary asks for help with her cranky 3 year old, and Amy suggest the family bed, and Beverly starts attacking the very idea of family beds and we take of on that topic, I think we've left Mary high and dry, yes?

Can anyone turn this mess of words into a short phrase or catchword? I'd sure appreciate it.

Please don't think I'm ignoring you Cricket2 - we need you! A soft gentle meandering into related topics is surely not a problem when you do it, but mabye we need to be cleaner about it because some of us aren't as good at self-monitoring when the focus is still on the OP and when it's wandered onto one of our personal hot-buttons and we are purely venting our general frustration? Perfectionism doesn't disapear when we reach adulthood, and can be turned outward as well as inward. I am proposing that after we type a post, we re-read it and say to ourselves "Could the OP take this the wrong way?" and "Have I just been reminded of an important but sidetracking discussion that I've been waiting all my life to have - maybe I'll start a new thread!" Then it's easy enough to cut/paste into a new topic. ((Ok, the waiting for anyone to answer isn't so much fun!))

I've been waiting my whole life to have almost all of these conversations! Yippee!
Grinity

I guess that was my point w/ my last post. I know that I am guilty of sidetracking like I mentioned in my #2 scenario when topics bring up hot button issues for me. I'll freely admit that I have major pet peeves about group ability tests and their use in iding gifted kids and the way gifted is mis/overidentified in many of the schools with which I am familiar. I am trying to ascertain if the times where I move in that direction on a thread are part of the problem here.

eta: I think that the reason I feel more free to discuss those types of issues here is b/c most of us have HG+ kids even if they aren't DYS level. I, personally, believe that HG+ kids are more harmed by policies that place huge #s of bright, high-achieving but not gifted kids in the GT classes and exclude kids who don't do well on group tests since HG kids are possibly more likely than mildly gifted kids to not do as well on a group test. Also, filling the classes that are supposed to meet gifted kids' needs with kids whose needs are much different b/c they aren't gifted is essentially a heterogenous grouping & leaves HG kids with nothing. This is kind of the only place I have to vent about it.

Locally, I only know of one or two families with whom I am friendly who have kids with GT ids who are in a similar spot to mine. On the other hand, most of the families I know casually or more closely do have GT ided kids. These kids are so different from mine, though, that these aren't the types of conversations we would have.

Maybe you could do it the opposite way. If the first thread has already derailed and built OT momentum instead of trying to redirect tye flow, clip and paste OP's first post and make them another thread. I have assumed if they still had questions they would have made another thread. When they don't I assumed they got whatever answer they needed and that's why they didn't persue it further.