I prefer to think of it more as a parent - child relationship. The Question is your child and it develops unexpected linkages (threads) throughout it's life span. You send it into the world but it takes on a life of it's own. This is what makes it exciting!

can a person own a thought----cool question-have some points-smile and enjoy the day

Does it really matter who owns what?

There's no way to have a discussion on AB, except by piling up Comments onto an Answer. So when things go back and forth, and go off on tangents, the Comment thread can contain all kinds of unrelated stuff that goes all over the place! But generally, all those sprawling Comments are more to do with the Answer than with the Question. The Question is more distant. Second, the particular Answer was what stimulated that string of Comments. The Question didn't much have to do with it at all. Third, I doubt the Questioner would even have time to respond to all the discussions that are conducted in all the various Comment threads for all the Answers. Only the Answerer would have time to deal with their own Comment thread. My opinion.

Yes its our question, but not fully. Its like the share market-51% belongs to you and 49% to others. They too have rights to express their opinions.But you can always decide whether you need them or not.

I think it belongs to the questioner until they decide to unsubscribe....

I think once you throw it out into the public domain, no one owns it, or if anyone does AB owns it. You may have thought of it, and you may generate other people to think, but there is no ownership. It is part of the AB community and it will have a life of its own.

Rosie, From lastwraiths' answer here, I just realized this Question may have been inspired by the chatty Comment thread over on http://www.answerbag.com/a_view/2087795 I'm not too hung up on who owns what threads, or how things go. But honestly, I don't think anyone was very upset in that thread, apart from your own reaction where: "you disappoint me greatly. I expected more from you. You are far too young to be so uptight. I shall obey your wishes..though I strongly disagree with you..again, you disappoint me greatly...although I am certain how I feel and what I think is of no consequence to you." To my sensibilities, it doesn't seem a big thing at all. It's just a small point of etiquette. If someone composes an Answer and is watching it for some deep responses, it seems fair to scoot people along who aren't really involved in that Answer. Most Answers are not so carefully placed and eagerly watched, so usually it doesn't matter. And of course we have chatting all over AnswerBag, so it's not a grand rule or even a guideline anywhere. It is a little thing... even less than saying "Shhh" at a library. It's about the scale of saying "Pardon me, could I get by through the door?" I don't see any insult intended there, no great drama, judgment, or rejection. It's perfectly fine for people to mingle by a door, and if the Answer occupant needs the space why not yield it to them? Not all threads will have a strong sense of purpose, where the author is set on watching them. But it seems an easy courtesy, when it happens, if unrelated conversation is distracting from the thread, why not create another thread for the chatting itself? This is only my sense of it, as an uninvolved party. It feels like the Answer author is a host, and I wouldn't take it as anything more than "Pardon me, I'm trying to watch for my responses here."

I think the popular answer would be: everyone because of this and that, blah blah. But IMHO, the comment thread does belong to the questioner and to those who have answered the question. If someone else is smart enough to butt in, I think they should also be smart enough to post an answer themselves, instead of just commenting. This is Answerbag, after all, not Commentbag.

I do not believe anyone *owns* a comment thread. I believe a comment thread is a public and social conversation between all people who choose to particiapte in it :)

I don't think anybody does, but ultimately the questioner should own it, because it was who started it and there wouldn't be answers if there wasn't a question

Actually, AB "owns" it. LOL While the questioner asked the question, it is the answer which is being discussed, usually, so I would say the Answerer. The threads only exist because of the answer. Actually, if you think about it, AB can be more compared to an MLM or Amway. AB is Amway, which owns the rights to it all. The questioner is the high-level IBO. The answerer is the next-level IBO. and the Comment threads are the IBO's customers. ;-) LOL

1) When you ask a question on AB, you are giving a question to the Answerbag community. In this very moment (or at least about 5 minutes after this, when you cannot modify the question anymore), the question does not belong to the asker anymore. 2) For the answers, it is somewhat different, you remain somehow the owner of your own answer, because you have the possibility to edit it at any time. When you edit your answer, it would be better to specify it clearly, to avoid making some comments look stupid. If the question seems clear enough, no further clarification will be requested. The goal of the answerer is then to propose a good answer to the question, as it is understood by the answerer. This could be different from giving the asker a satisfactory answer, because the asker could still have understood the question differently. In the end, the best answer will not be the answer which satisfies best the asker, it will be the answer that appeals more to the community. For instance, a lot of people could find a joke reply very funny, although it does not answer the question, does not help the asker, and even makes fun of the asker, so that the asker is very annoyed by this answer. But this answer will be the best answer. 3) Our everyday practice on Answerbag shows that nobody is owning the comment thread to an answer. Anyone can write anything in the comment thread. I use to give the name of the person I am addressing at the beginning of each comment, it makes communication easier. Also, inside a comment thread, two users could discuss about two different interpretations of the questions, without one of those being the asker's interpretation. Two users could also discuss about something completely different, having nothing to do with the question. 4) If an asker is not satisfied by the answers they get, they could always point at this in the comment thread. But if the answerer is not interested to see the question the same way, they are entitled to do so. It is not very nice to the asker, but it is the way it works. If the asker then insists, this could lead to negative reactions. If you say that the asker "owns" the comment thread of an answer to their question, this statement is a wish, or maybe some kind of informal fair play or politeness rule, but it does not always reflect the daily practice. I would consider it sometimes rude, but usually not offensive. Forgetting the asker's interest in comment threads is not nice, but it is not against the rules!