thread closures

NMSquirrel

NMSquirrel

OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12
Valued Senior Member
when a moderator closes a thread we need a reason they close it.

not a 'That is enough. Closed. ' as syne did for the supernatural eve thread.

that comment only infers that moderators attitude towards the thread and not any sci-forums policies.
there was no hostile disagreements or arguments in that thread.
no one was getting flamed, everyone was being reasonable,
how did that thread violate sci-forum rules?

do moderators have permission to close thread based only on their personal distaste for the subject matter?
this is how it appears without an explanation.
 
No, a reason is supposed to be given and, in truth, we are supposed to do our best to keep personal bias and feeling out of our moderating...
 
It depends. Sometimes I do document it in the thread, other times I will document my reasons for closing it in the Action Notes thread in the forum I moderate.

Syne was asked about the thread in question and he advises that he closed it because of the youtube video linked there due to its insulting nature and because it was inappropriate.

He could have edited it out, but editing people's posts can be fraught with danger, so he chose to avoid such issues by closing the thread.
 
Kittamaru, you locked the thread:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread...olling-Lying&p=3160457&viewfull=1#post3160457

For this reason: Okay, this is now sufficiently so off-course and meaningless as to warrant no further discussion... nothing of value is getting accomplished here.


I protest. I had not even begun my planned useless tangent and making an arse out of myself with copious amounts of half-baked drama. The moderator team my think I was sufficiently out to lunch already, but prithee, grant me more time in the future to pick up some infractions from pointless prose.

Thank you.
 
Beer, I'm not sure if you are being hilariously and obliquely sardonic, or if you are serious XD
 
NMSquirrel said:
when a moderator closes a thread we need a reason they close it.
Click to expand...

We would, if the moderators thought of the rest of us as friends and equals, and if they had any concern about what the rest of us think. I'm not convinced that's always the case.

not a 'That is enough. Closed. ' as syne did for the supernatural eve thread.

that comment only infers that moderators attitude towards the thread and not any sci-forums policies.
there was no hostile disagreements or arguments in that thread.
no one was getting flamed, everyone was being reasonable,
how did that thread violate sci-forum rules?
Click to expand...

I wasn't really paying any attention to that thread. (I still haven't read it.) I rarely look at GIA's threads, since they usually seem to be him/her morally criticizing Bible stories. I'm not a Christian or a Jew, so I'm not particularly interested in studying or arguing about the Bible's contents.

That means that I'm not going to comment on Syne's actions in that thread.

do moderators have permission to close thread based only on their personal distaste for the subject matter?
this is how it appears without an explanation.
Click to expand...

Just speaking in general, and not about this particular incident, the bottom line on Sciforums seems to be that there's nobody able (or at least willing) to manage the moderators. So they are free to do pretty much whatever they feel like doing. Some of the moderators have their own passionately-held agendas, they are easily angered by opposing views, and when they get mad, shit happens.

That's just how Sciforums is, I guess, and that's how it's going to remain. Its rank-and-file participants have no choice but to get used to it, or else move on to more congenial places.

I still find Sciforums kind of perversely entertaining, but I fully expect to be banned at some point. Either that, or the atmosphere will eventually become so stifling that I'll just lose interest entirely and walk away. I'm closer to that point today than I was yesterday.
 
You mean you'd like to see moderators argue among themselves more. As when moderators argue with lowly members that are as equally out of it, it is an unfair advantage.

I would concur with my above statement, but as I am a fickle mush-head, I will disagree with myself sooner rather than later.
 
"This thread is closed!"

is the moderators equivalent of:

"First"

On a serious note, when I do close threads they tend to be due to them either being extremely old threads necro'd by spammers, or when someone's gone off on a post binge opening threads left, right and centre without actually considering they should post content. If a member has a query about a closure, they can ask the moderator that closed it why via PM.
 
The blame for this mess falls directly on James' head.

I mean, he promotes and maintains the worst possible personalities for the job of moderator, and then wonders why the site is constantly in chaos. Gee, Jimmy, maybe if you didn't allow Bells to ruthlessly insult people while her buddy, the arch-liberal Tiassa, bans people for responding even remotely in kind, and maybe if you didn't bring on the single most pretentious and rude poster on Sciforums to moderate the single-most contentious subforum for the sole purpose of trolling me, then the place would probably run a little smoother.

You wonder why the best posters are in the past? Take a look at who's in charge. I mean, I'm no fan of lightgigantic, but sexual harassment? And it stood? Are you guys satirizing yourselves at this point?
 
Balerion said:
...maybe if you didn't bring on the single most pretentious and rude poster on Sciforums to moderate the single-most contentious subforum for the sole purpose of trolling me, then the place would probably run a little smoother.
Click to expand...
Aspire to pretentiousness much there J?
 
*snrk*

Oh no, Balerion, you have uncovered James master plot... to destroy Sci Forums from within via his minions of moderators.
 
I've personally not had a problem with any moderators. Tiassa, does seem a bit quick. I do kinda' feel for Fraggle Rocker about embarrassment from a show discord. Yet, I'm still not wearing the shoes of a moderator, hence, I empathize only in theory :) I did actually quote Bells and Kittamaru on another forum in needing a third party perspective cause my own words would have been to invoke all the fires of hell on a subject. Bells comments were also particularly hilarious but that's another story...
 
I do my best to be that third party perspective, but sometimes, I'm not abashed to admit, I have issues putting myself in certain perspectives :)
 
Balerion said:
You wonder why the best posters are in the past? Take a look at who's in charge.
Click to expand...
i believe james has "been in charge" for as long as i can remember.
i also believe there are 3 admins, not one.

you aren't going to lay all of this on james head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top