New topic
Printable| Author | Message |
Locking threads to create new ones This relates to a wider problem across the forums, which sees moderators increasingly curtailing valid, non-rule-breaking user-generated discourse and channelling all discourse into moderator created structures.
Here's just one specific example: http://www.prince.org/msg/3/234655 Now one might ask - why is that thread locked exactly? In this particular case - referring users to another sticky thread is all very well, but why close the original thread? My own view is that I think it is rude. It is inconsiderate to the person who created the original thread, and the people who took the time to post on it. You're not aiding discussion, you're shutting it down. Regardless if intent, it looks a lot like some moderator didn't like the way the debate was going or the way the tide of opinion was turning (because the thread was critical of moderation decisions) and wanted to control the conversation more. Moderators need to be particularly careful when moderating debates about site moderation - such efforts should be minimal and in adherance to Ben's site T&Cs. My suggestion: if Prince.org users raise a point of discussion on a topic that mods feel merits a sticky, then show some courtesy and make that user-created thread sticky. Locking it and creating your own moderator-penned thread is a really shitty attempt at dominating discourse. If there's one forum where mods should not get away with that shit, it is the Site Discussion forum. [Edited 7/16/07 11:57am] | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
im not a fan of locking threads in this forum period...i think the exception should be when the discussion has fully run its course and folks are just talking in circles...
but this trend of "i've answered your questions so  " " is one that i've never been comfortable with...
...and i've wondered how it started in the first place. [Edited 7/16/07 15:08pm] Space for sale... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
sosgemini said: im not a fan of locking threads in this forum period...i think the exception should be when the discussion has fully run its course and folks are just talking in circles...
but this trend of "i've answered your questions so " " is one that i've never been comfortable with...
...and i've wondered how it started in the first place. [Edited 7/16/07 15:08pm] Agreed. Actually, I think it started when the previous batch of mods got criticised and one of them started locking threads or just banning folks....wonder who that was? Then, with all y'all "new" mods there was a whole diff atmosphere in this forum where you could seriously ask, suggest, question and especially criticise without being banned (which was unheard of before). Now it seems to be back to something in between and it needs to stop. Like you say, there's no need, or excuse, to lock threads in this forum unless they break site rules. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Ex-Moderator |
sosgemini said: im not a fan of locking threads in this forum period...i think the exception should be when the discussion has fully run its course and folks are just talking in circles...
but this trend of "i've answered your questions so " " is one that i've never been comfortable with...
...and i've wondered how it started in the first place. [Edited 7/16/07 15:08pm] I agree. There's always room for questions. Other mods, what say ye? |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ian, you need an avatar.
And, I agree. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Moderator
|
ian said: This relates to a wider problem across the forums, which sees moderators increasingly curtailing valid, non-rule-breaking user-generated discourse and channelling all discourse into moderator created structures.
Here's just one specific example: http://www.prince.org/msg/3/234655 Now one might ask - why is that thread locked exactly? In this particular case - referring users to another sticky thread is all very well, but why close the original thread? My own view is that I think it is rude. It is inconsiderate to the person who created the original thread, and the people who took the time to post on it. You're not aiding discussion, you're shutting it down. Regardless if intent, it looks a lot like some moderator didn't like the way the debate was going or the way the tide of opinion was turning (because the thread was critical of moderation decisions) and wanted to control the conversation more. Moderators need to be particularly careful when moderating debates about site moderation - such efforts should be minimal and in adherance to Ben's site T&Cs. My suggestion: if Prince.org users raise a point of discussion on a topic that mods feel merits a sticky, then show some courtesy and make that user-created thread sticky. Locking it and creating your own moderator-penned thread is a really shitty attempt at dominating discourse. If there's one forum where mods should not get away with that shit, it is the Site Discussion forum. [Edited 7/16/07 11:57am] I started the new thread for the poll so that it would be "fresh" and free from bias... then I apparently made a biased remark in the initial post. I never said I was perfect... I edited and removed my biased statement. I locked the other thread to allow the conversation to continue in the new thread - but, now I see that was a mistake as well... I figured the conversation would be better suited in the new thread, especially after sos asked us not to create a bitch-fest. In shutting it down, I thought I'd stop the argument and let the poll speak for itself. I guess sometimes I think everything is an easy fix... but, I forget, I'm at the Org, where nothing is that simple. So here we are, on the third or so thread from the same topic... I'm reopening the other thread hoping it will lead to more stimulating conversation. Enjoy. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
moderator