Does anybody else find it odd that in the section labeled "SF open government" over 70% of all the threads have been locked by moderators. Doesn't seem very open at all. As I see it, this fact can be interpretted in only one of two ways. Either there is no such thing as "open government" on this forum, or there really isn't an intelligent community hear at all. Would anybody care to offer an alternate explanation for why every suggestion thread in open government is shut down? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! If no explanation can be given I suggest shutting down "SF Open Government" as it is clearly a farce. Perhaps you should title it, "The Wish Box".
Well, for one thing, 70% isn't even close to the number of threads locked. For another thing, if you look at the threads that HAVE been locked, they are pretty much all ban threads, which are against the rules. It is also against the rules to post threads against the mods. Any problems you have should be PMed to Porfiry, not posted. Well the fact that you're allowed to post a thread bitching about it is the first sign that it's more open than you think. When an issue has been discussed and decided on, why keep the thread open? But it doesn't matter because they don't lock all the suggestion threads. Quixote, you have 9 posts, it doesn't really sound like you spend much time here, so I hardly think you qualify for making statements such as these. If you had tried to suggest something and got ignored, I could see this being a valid thread, but as it stands, just stop posting before you really piss them off. JLocke
Mods = Authority. Authority = Oppression. Oppression is a sign of totalitarianism, dictatorship, and abuse of power.
I see no problem there. You're perfectly welcome to set up your own forums and leave them unmoderated if you wish. If you think you're oppressed here, just go do it. No one can stop you.
That is known as blogging. Its only a matter of time when there will be a blog + forum + rating by all
the administration here has worked perfectly well with the exception of banning undecided. i see no reason why you woud want to change it, if everything was run on a vote, then the majority of trolls/flamers/idiots would have the forum on its head and up its arse in 10 seconds.
No, not at all. I'm talking about a wide-open FORUM where anyone can discuss and say anything they want to. Active participation of a large number of people can hardly be called "blogging." He's certainly free to also set up a blog if he wishes but that's a completely different thing.
OK, but what is the problem with members instead of moderators rating the posts as A = Good B = doubtful C = Hoax D = Obsene E = Outrageous Just look at the previous rating and decide to click the post. ie. if A = 10 and C = 2 , I will choose to view the post. The above is just an example , actually there is lot to debate on how to go about implementing and what to.
In my opinion, I think the moderators here have a little too much power. I think the 'ban' threads, as obnoxious as they were, actually served a purpose and the majority would have agreed to most of our decisions as well. Now ban threads are forbidden, and the arbitration lies solely in the hands of the moderators. And what about thread ratings? Do moderators shut down threads that have bad ratings? We ought to rate threads more often. This forum is intellectually advanced, so I think the Sciforums government should reflect this.
i have had threads deleted and posts deleted and there is one thing i would like to say: quixote,shut up
they should do that becuase If U think its not fair, then U r supposed to start your own forum and show how it can be done.
