You sly cat! Time to tweak but namely expand the theory
Definition:
topic (noun): "a matter dealt with in a text, discourse, or conversation; a subject."
Indeed, the focus is not on "searching for a topic" but since the topic is Topics - although the focus
can be the topics themselves and what might be considered a topic, it need not be, because a topic (noun) isn't a material or abstract thing in and of itself, for rather a material or abstract thing through construction of perception is defined as a topic; or else a material or abstract thing is made a topic by default when it is becomes the subject matter of unregulated discussion. Nothing is intrinsically actualised as a topic, but everything is potentially a topic. Anything can become a topic, it need only adhere to the definition one gives (in a regulated discussion in which topics are defined) or it need only be discussed (in a non-regulated discussion where there is no topic that has been defined).
The topic of the OP is not "topic" in the singular, but "topics". Therefore since "topics" has been defined as the topic, and a topic is any-thing which has been defined as such, and "topics" include every every material or abstract thing, every material or abstract thing (everything) has been defined as a topic, and so discussing any-thing is on topic. [*This assumes the point made on the meaning attributed to the plural: "topics" made where the other * lies].
If the topic were the animal "pigs" we'd be bound to discussing pigs - the animal, and anything associated with it because the word pigs limits us to
a-thing: pig/pigs. Yet since the topic is "topics" and
any-thing is a potential topic and becomes an actual topic as soon as it is discussed (from frogs, to Stu's urges), we're bound to discussing not any particular thing or things (i.e. the meaning of "topics", what is meant by a topic, what is a good topic etc.), but
any-thing. Yet if by the plural of "topics"
@hush meant all conceivable topics, as opposed to simply more than one topic, but less than all topics, we're bound to discussing not just
any-thing but
every-thing.*
Why? Topic (noun): "a matter dealt with in a text, discourse, or conversation; a subject."
In the OP it has the topic as Topics in the plural, which is defined as: "matters dealt with in a text, discourse or conversation; subjects."
And since anything we discuss is itself 'a matter dealt with in a text, discourse or conversation' it is on one hand impossible to derail this thread as the OP permits
anything but possibly requires discussing
everything. The only way one could derail this thread is by failing to post something on
anything -which would be nothing, and so actually, to post nothing (impossible on one level, possible on another) is the closet one can get to derailing this thread.
On the other hand, it has the potential to be an endless quest for a topic - not that this quest is the focus of the thread, but a likely, although non-necessary, consequence of an OP which permits anything. For to keep on topic, is to discuss "topics", and this permits (requires) discussion on anything/everything.
Oh man. I'm gonna fall unconscious.
I'm out! This is too much and I can't be bothered looking for possible holes in what I said o_0