The new super button for moderators.

[Trouble]

http://img3.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/animated/anim_09.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net/free-adult-smileys.php)

Ooooooh David Bailey has just shut a thread down (quite rightly so i think in this circumstance) with a click of the button that simply says... THREAD CLOSED.

What do we think about this guys. Is this a good thing or could this new power go to the moderators heads. LOL xxx

http://img3.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/evilgrin/evilgrin0036.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net/free-unhappy-smileys.php)

[CJ]

I have just noticed we have a thread closed. It wasn't taken outside; it was closed.

:confused:

Was this for our own protection? Was this to stop consenting adults from exchanging views?? Or was it a cunning ploy to stop discussion on an emotive subject?!?

This is a dance forum. (well, it was once) Occasionally dance stuff comes up for discussion. Usually, there are far more pressing subjects... U know... which Trouble sister U'd do, the ugliest Girls Aloud girl, where the apostrophe goes, etc...

Sometimes, there is constructive debate. Anyone here long enough will remember the last one which was spring of '03 (I think). Sometimes, we disappear up our collective bums trying to make the other see our point of view... to varying degrees of success.

Usually, we are almost adult about it and no-one gets hurt.

So, my Q.. (as I don't have a point).. is: have New Labour taken over the Forum??

My 2nd Q is this: should it be "Have New Labour..." or "Has New Labour..."?

[JiveLad]

http://img3.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/animated/anim_09.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net/free-adult-smileys.php)

Ooooooh David Bailey has just shut a thread down (quite rightly so i think in this circumstance) with a click of the button that simply says... THREAD CLOSED.

What do we think about this guys. Is this a good thing or could this new power go to the moderators heads. LOL xxx

http://img3.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/evilgrin/evilgrin0036.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net/free-unhappy-smileys.php)

Which thread was that?

[Lory]

Which thread was that?

I miss all the drama...

...goes off to investigate! :devil:

[Trouble]

Which thread was that?


Oh you know the boring tedious one about peoples grammer and spelling that actually turned into Ant verses the world thread.

<YAWN> XX

[azande]

I have just noticed we have a thread closed. It wasn't taken outside; it was closed.

:confused:

Was this for our own protection? Was this to stop consenting adults from exchanging views?? Or was it a cunning ploy to stop discussion on an emotive subject?!?

This is a dance forum. (well, it was once) Occasionally dance stuff comes up for discussion. Usually, there are far more pressing subjects... U know... which Trouble sister U'd do, the ugliest Girls Aloud girl, where the apostrophe goes, etc...

Sometimes, there is constructive debate. Anyone here long enough will remember the last one which was spring of '03 (I think). Sometimes, we disappear up our collective bums trying to make the other see our point of view... to varying degrees of success.

Usually, we are almost adult about it and no-one gets hurt.

So, my Q.. (as I don't have a point).. is: have New Labour taken over the Forum??

My 2nd Q is this: should it be "Have New Labour..." or "Has New Labour..."?

:lol:I should have known it. I negative repped DJ because I objected to him closing the thread and I couldn't be bothered to start a new one saying that, and now there's not one but two of these.

[martingold]

Oh you know the boring tedious one about peoples grammer and spelling that actually turned into Ant verses the world thread.

<YAWN> XX
Just when it was getting exciting :na:

[David Bailey]

:lol:I should have known it. I negative repped DJ because I objected to him closing the thread and I couldn't be bothered to start a new one saying that, and now there's not one but two of these.

Not any more :devil:

[Trouble]

:lol:I should have known it. I negative repped DJ because I objected to him closing the thread and I couldn't be bothered to start a new one saying that, and now there's not one but two of these.

not anymore there isn't. !! :whistle:

[robd]

Can you imagine any moderator except DB choosing to close a thread?

No, me neither.

[Trouble]

Can you imagine any moderator except DB choosing to close a thread?

No, me neither.

Oh i dont know. I think Ducasi could have his moments. Lory too. :flower:

[David Bailey]

Was this for our own protection? Was this to stop consenting adults from exchanging views?? Or was it a cunning ploy to stop discussion on an emotive subject?!?
It's an experiment.

The problem we've found with taking "emotive" stuff outside, is that it simply tends to get more emotive - people seem to take the move as license to get even more aggressive.

So I thought I'd see if closure was more effective as a mechanism.

I'm happy to debate the general topic, and for feedback on the general concept of "How to cool threads down" - as I said, it's an experiment.


So, my Q.. (as I don't have a point).. is: have New Labour taken over the Forum??
Wait until we start taxing you to the hilt then giving you back your own money and presenting it as a gift, that's my advice :wink:

[David Bailey]

Can you imagine any moderator except DB choosing to close a thread?

:D

I reckon it's short-man-power-crazed syndrome :wink:

Oh, and I did close down a thread before - Learning Tango, ironically. By mistake :blush:

[azande]

Can you imagine any moderator except DB choosing to close a thread?

No, me neither.

:yeah:

[Lory]

Oh i dont know. I think Ducasi could have his moments. Lory too. :flower:
Right, that's it, where's that button? :devil:

:wink:

[martingold]

I'm happy to debate the general topic, and for feedback on the general concept of "How to cool threads down" - as I said, it's an experiment.

Bucket of water??????

[azande]

It's an experiment.

The problem we've found with taking "emotive" stuff outside, is that it simply tends to get more emotive - people seem to take the move as license to get even more aggressive.

So I thought I'd see if closure was more effective as a mechanism.

I'm happy to debate the general topic, and for feedback on the general concept of "How to cool threads down" - as I said, it's an experiment.


Wait until we start taxing you to the hilt then giving you back your own money and presenting it as a gift, that's my advice :wink:

As far as I see it, more than "cooling down the thread" is "you guys stop, right now".

What would happen if I were to start a new thread on the same subject by quoting and referencing the closed thread? Would it go a different direction? Whould discussion be different? Would it be closed as well?

[Trouble]

which Trouble sister U'd do,

?

Blimey i missed that one.!!

And i note... only people not happy about the button thread are the ones that were going completely weird on the thread that was shut.!!!

Isnt that spooky.

I think when a topic has been discussed to death and eventually leads to an arguement or pointless repeats of what was said.. it should be shut. Infact if i was a moderator i would delete it for making me waste precious time in my life reading it.

[martingold]

which Trouble sister U'd do,
neither cos barbs would kill me well thats if i didnt get killed by just doing one of the trouble sisters :what:

[Franck]

As far as I see it, more than "cooling down the thread" is "you guys stop, right now".

What would happen if I were to start a new thread on the same subject by quoting and referencing the closed thread? Would it go a different direction? Whould discussion be different? Would it be closed as well?I am also interested in the experiment, and totally agreed with David Bailey closing the thread.

It wasn't about "you guys, stop, right now!", but more about, "this thread is going in circles now with very little added to it, and more abuse coming out".

It is useful to see if 'Closing threads' is more controversial than moving them outside and as David Bailey said, it is an experiment, all feedback gratefully received. Many fora use the 'close thread' option very successfully, but I'm not sure if ours is ready for it yet!

Nothing would happen if you started a new thread on the same subject, especially if it somehow allowed everyone a fresh start.

[CJ]

And i note... only people not happy about the button thread are the ones that were going completely weird on the thread that was shut.!!!

If U would take the time to show me where I was "completely weird", I'd be grateful.:flower:

My concern is about censorship, about the freedom of debate, (even when it becomes debacle) not about the subject matter.

[David Bailey]

fora
Cor, you're posh you are.


Nothing would happen if you started a new thread on the same subject, especially if it somehow allowed everyone a fresh start.
Also an interesting experiment.

Basically, the Forum's one big messy Petri dish :D

[azande]

I am also interested in the experiment, and totally agreed with David Bailey closing the thread.

It wasn't about "you guys, stop, right now!", but more about, "this thread is going in circles now with very little added to it, and more abuse coming out".

It is useful to see if 'Closing threads' is more controversial than moving them outside and as David Bailey said, it is an experiment, all feedback gratefully received. Many fora use the 'close thread' option very successfully, but I'm not sure if ours is ready for it yet!

Nothing would happen if you started a new thread on the same subject, especially if it somehow allowed everyone a fresh start.
Just to clarify, I don't really want to open a new thread about :banghead: grammar :banghead: but I wonder if a fresh start would really make things different, in this or in any other case.

I can see the option of closing threads being useful in some occasions but I'd rather see threads die a natural death Outside rather than being closed.

[Trouble]

If U would take the time to show me where I was "completely weird", I'd be grateful.:flower:

My concern is about censorship, about the freedom of debate, (even when it becomes debacle) not about the subject matter.

Actually CJ, you were ok. :flower: Your comments were constructive and did not get personal to others.

Freedom of debate is one thing. Turning a thread into i said this, you said that, i didn't mean that, this is what you meant is in my opinion totally silly then on top of that... little digs and unnecessary comments get chucked in.

I agree with closing a thread. It gives people a chance to calm down.

Freedom is still there. As Franck already said, there is nothing to stop you opening up the thread again and starting afresh ie: actually getting back to the point of the thread in the first place or maybe starting a new one that covers something else that came up. :flower:

[David Bailey]

My concern is about censorship, about the freedom of debate, (even when it becomes debacle) not about the subject matter.
Moderation is censorship, that's 95% of what we do.

The job is to keep as much free speech as possible, whilst remaining within the rules and also promoting a friendly and welcoming atmosphere.

So the questions are:

How much censorship / moderation do we as a forum want?
What are the most effective tools for the job?

[martingold]

Moderation is censorship, that's 95% of what we do.

The job is to keep as much free speech as possible, whilst remaining within the rules and also promoting a friendly and welcoming atmosphere.

So the questions are:

How much censorship / moderation do we as a forum want?
What are the most effective tools for the job?


The whole problem with moderating is its a thankless task
no matter what you do someone will think you have done wrong or done something just to appease a friend
Personally i think that the level of moderation is about right ok i disagree with certain rules i think i have made myself plain enough on that but in general the moderation is balanced.
I mean you get lory on one side calm thoughtful etc and then you get djb with his button :na:

[Lou]

And i note... only people not happy about the button thread are the ones that were going completely weird on the thread that was shut.!!!





I have to buck the trend. :) I think that closing the thread was a bad idea, and I only posted on the old thread to point out that Azande's a bloke (as I know how annoying getting the sex wrong can be ;) ) .

It's true that posts get more heated once they're outside, but it serves the purpose of clearing the air and keeps the discussion in one place where you can easily avoid it, if you so wish. IMO, closing the thread instead will lead to frustration and I suspect the argument will continue elsewhere where it can be less easily avoided. Besides, all outside posts die a natural death, anyway. Why change something that works so well? I've always thought "outside" was such an enlightened idea - why should this forum move backwards to use methods suited to less sophisticated fora? ;) (nice word, Franck!)

[CJ]

Moderation is censorship, that's 95% of what we do.

The job is to keep as much free speech as possible, whilst remaining within the rules and also promoting a friendly and welcoming atmosphere.


Hence, my concern.

Would U be happy to point out to me posts where the rules were broken within that thread?

Friendly and welcoming atmosphere?? Do we start vetting who joins, too??:angry:

[Stuart M]

It's an experiment.

The problem we've found with taking "emotive" stuff outside, is that it simply tends to get more emotive - people seem to take the move as license to get even more aggressive.

So I thought I'd see if closure was more effective as a mechanism.
Well, eh, closure will be a more effective mechanism, because, eh, no one can post at all*. I can't help but think the thread title has clouded judgement here :rolleyes: .

From what I've seen, closing threads on other fora seems to occur where the potential for legal infringement occurs (certainly not the case here), or the fora in question is huge (not really the case here, comparitively speaking) and so moderation tends to be on the brutal side (increasingly tending to be the case here, sadly). WRT the specific thread in question, it would have been more sensible to let it die a natural death. I'd stopped actively participating in it a while back - as had several others, I suspect. Eventually everyone would, or it would have Gone Outside if necessary.

Unnecessarily aggressive moderation, if you ask me. It's getting a little tiresome IMO.

*without going to the hassle of raising an entirely new thread.

[JiveLad]

I am slightly surprised by this action (although I did not post on that thread).

I think one thing that has been mentioned in the past is the importance of face to face contact to help smooth out communication.

To that end, I propose we have a budget for moderators to become roving peacemakers, which would involve driving to see forumites, have a chat and a cup of tea and a piece of cake, then possibly driving with other forumites to meet up and resolve the issues face to face over another cup of tea and some more cake. If necessary, this could be done internationally to the Antipodes as well for example.

The other possibility is to take David Bailey to the European Court for infringing the Human Rights of forumites.

[CJ]

*without going to the hassle of raising an entirely new thread.

I strongly recommend no-one starts a thread on grammar... U get flamed for being a language snob.:lol:

And, FWIW, I agree with Toaster Boy on this occasion: unnecessary and heavy handed. Who gave the short guy the button?!?!?:banghead:

[philsmove]

lets face it, the thread was getting a tiny weeny bit Boring

[martingold]

lets face it, the thread was getting a tiny weeny bit Boring
:yeah:

[ducasi]

Can you imagine any moderator except DB choosing to close a thread?

No, me neither.

I was going to suggest it, just haven't had the time this morning. It was the right thing to do. The thread was going no-where but down...

[David Franklin]

Moderation is censorship, that's 95% of what we do.Not that I have experience of your side of the fence, but if 95% of what you do is censorship, I suggest you're doing it wrong. (Active spam deletion potentially excepted, if a lot more of that happens than I'm aware of).

To use a 'bouncer' analogy, yeah, bouncers can get physical. But a good bouncer tries to stop it ever getting that far.

On this forum, I know there are times when I could have done with a mod giving a gentle nudge saying "You're going a bit far - wanna tone it down?". But this never seems to happen, instead the mods wait for things to blow up and then start deleting and infracting.

In the thread under discussion, I would have preferred a "Cool it guys, or we'll have to close the thread" warning before it was closed (although I was personally pretty much done with it anyhow).

Just my $0.02c.

[David Bailey]

Would U be happy to point out to me posts where the rules were broken within that thread?
No, because
- I have a life
- I don't like your use of "U" :na:

More seriously, please keep this at a "general" level, rather than discussing specific threads, OK?


Friendly and welcoming atmosphere?? Do we start vetting who joins, too??:angry:
Don't understand - what's the joining criteria got to do with anything? :confused:

[Trouble]

lets face it, the thread was getting a tiny weeny bit Boring

:yeah:

slight understatement. :D

[David Bailey]

Not that I have experience of your side of the fence, but if 95% of what you do is censorship, I suggest you're doing it wrong. (Active spam deletion potentially excepted, if a lot more of that happens than I'm aware of).
I'm including things like thread splitting, thread merging, and general "tidying up" activities as "censorship" - in a sense, they are, in that they affect the course of free speech.

Hopefully they affect it beneficially, but it's still "censorship". Or, moderation, depending on your point of view.


In the thread under discussion, I would have preferred a "Cool it guys, or we'll have to close the thread" warning before it was closed (although I was personally pretty much done with it anyhow)
Good suggestion - sounds like a good idea; if we repeat this exercise, we should probably follow such a process.

[CJ]

lets face it, the thread was getting a tiny weeny bit Boring

I can't argue with your observation. Well, maybe the tiny weeny bit... However, are we going to close all threads that are going nowhere or have become boring?!?:what:


No, because
- I have a life
- I don't like you're use of "U" :na:

More seriously, please keep this at a "general" level, rather than discussing specific threads, OK?


Don't understand - what's the joining criteria got to do with anything? :confused:


Well, if U hadn't closed a specific thread we wouldn't have had a specific thread to dscuss, now, would we? However, U did close a specific thread for specific reasons: I am asking U for examples of those reasons because I, possibly singularly, fail to see where those reasons existed.

Why should "I" have special treatment? Why must it be "I" and not "Eye" yet it is "you" we use and not "U"? Surely, "U" and "I" are equals??

David, U know very well that not everyone on this forum is "nice, fluffy, warm or welcoming". If someone isn't sticking to the rules by being so, we (U) infract, etc... In order to protect our fluffiness, are we to vet incomers and noobs?

[Lou]

I was going to suggest it, just haven't had the time this morning. It was the right thing to do. The thread was going no-where but down...

I agree action was needed - I was feeling for poor ant as he continued digging himself deeper and deeper down that hole, but why close it instead of sticking it "outside"?

Why use such a blunt tool when you've got a far better way?

[robd]

lets face it, the thread was getting a tiny weeny bit Boring

If that's a reason for closing a thread then I can see that shiny new button rapidly dulling through over use :rolleyes:

I can accept it's an experiment (though DB did close one of the Cerocport threads briefly IIRC), it was just a surprise to see this one closed without warning. I didn't feel it had gone too far though clearly there were intractable differences of opinion between some of the contributors (though no more so than on the recent 'Without God' thread).

[ducasi]

I agree action was needed - I was feeling for poor ant as he continued digging himself deeper and deeper down that hole, but why close it instead of sticking it "outside"?

Why use such a blunt tool when you've got a far better way?
Outside doesn't stop the descent.

[Franck]

I agree action was needed - I was feeling for poor ant as he continued digging himself deeper and deeper down that hole, but why close it instead of sticking it "outside"?

Why use such a blunt tool when you've got a far better way?There is no 'conspiracy why'.

Closing the thread was an option, and in this case it felt like the right thing to do, especially as the last few times we sent threads outside there was heavy criticism. It was worth trying as a moderation option.

Thanks to the feedback on this thread, we (the moderating team) are able to see where its use would be appropriate (or not). I particularly like David Franklin's suggestion of a "Cool it guys, or we'll have to close the thread" warning.

In any event, if you all feel very strongly about it, we can re-open the thread, put it outside and let the downward spiral resume. Having read the thread, I think that would do nobody involved any favours, but I might be wrong.

Keep giving your feedback either way!

[whitetiger1518]

I'm including things like thread splitting, thread merging, and general "tidying up" activities as "censorship" - in a sense, they are, in that they affect the course of free speech.

Hopefully they affect it beneficially, but it's still "censorship". Or, moderation, depending on your point of view.


Good suggestion - sounds like a good idea; if we repeat this exercise, we should probably follow such a process.

My tuppenceworth ;)

According to the Cambridge Online Dictionary:

censor
noun [C]

a person whose job is to read books, watch films, etc. in order to remove anything offensive from them, or who reads private letters, especially sent during war or from prison, to remove parts considered unsuitable

and

moderator
noun [C]
1 (US USUALLY mediator) FORMAL someone who tries to help other people come to an agreement:
An independent moderator should be appointed to oversee the negotiations.

2 US someone who makes certain that a formal discussion happens without problems and follows the rules:
He challenged the president to a series of TV debates. Just the two of them, with no moderator.


I think that it might be useful if we got a "Circles Warning" from a moderator for threads that become a bit repetitive - even just that "might" get us back on topic.


On the other hand - Franck would have to employ far more moderators - after all getting off topic is our favourite hobby :lol:

Whitetiger

[NZ Monkey]

IMO, closing the thread instead will lead to frustration and I suspect the argument will continue elsewhere where it can be less easily avoided. I thought it had been pretty much tied up to be honest. I think any points that were going to me made already had, and I was prepared to let it pass on. In fact, I think that was probably the perfect place to end it, although it was rather sudden.

I'm not frustrated that the thread has been closed. Surprised, but not frustrated.

[David Bailey]

moderator
noun [C]
1 (US USUALLY mediator) FORMAL someone who tries to help other people come to an agreement:
An independent moderator should be appointed to oversee the negotiations.

2 US someone who makes certain that a formal discussion happens without problems and follows the rules:
He challenged the president to a series of TV debates. Just the two of them, with no moderator.[/COLOR]

That's not a useful definition - there's a better one here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_forum#Moderator):

The moderators (short singular form: "mod") are users of the forum which are granted access to the posts and threads of all members for the purpose of moderating discussion (similar to arbitration) and also keeping the forum clean (neutralising spam and spambots etc). Because they have access to all posts and threads in their area of responsibility, it is common for a knowledgeable and trustworthy member to be promoted to moderator for such a task. Moderators themselves may have ranks: some may be given mod privilege over only a particular topic or section, while others (called 'global') may be allowed access anywhere. Common privileges of moderators include: deleting, merging, moving, and splitting of posts and threads; closing, renaming, stickying of threads; banning, unbanning, warning the members; or adding, editing, removing the polls of threads

Heh, "knowledgeable and trustworthy" :D

On a lighter note:


Why use such a blunt tool when you've got a far better way?
Because I'm power-crazed. Didn't you get the memo? :confused: Minions, can't trust them to do anything right.... :D


I can accept it's an experiment (though DB did close one of the Cerocport threads briefly IIRC)
Did I? Don't think so... Someone else may have, but I don't recall that either.

So, possibly, I'm both power-crazed and very forgetful. :eek:

[Maxine]

I does feel like a bit of a fascist tool that can stifle debate (if you can call the last few posts debate) but to be honest I never felt more grateful to see an end of a thread :clap::clap:(help have I now become pro fascist:eek:)

[David Bailey]

(help have I now become pro fascist:eek:)
If it helps, I reckon you're look really :yum: in jackboots... :wink:

[robd]

Did I? Don't think so... Someone else may have, but I don't recall that either.

You did. Here is the evidence (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showpost.php?p=497422&postcount=230)


So, possibly, I'm both power-crazed and very forgetful. :eek:

You certainly seem to enjoy a selective memory.

[Maxine]

If it helps, I reckon you're look really :yum: in jackboots... :wink:

I'll wear them for Berko on Sunday, perfect for a tango (well my style of tango anyway).

[Stuart M]

... but to be honest I never felt more grateful to see an end of a thread :clap::clap:
Well, as with TV, the option is always to avoid watching that channel/thread :grin: .

Personally, I'd rather decide what threads are boring for myself, rather than let the mods decide it for me. That's what I already do with most of the "Who's going where this weekend?" and various games threads. And I'm sure lots of (most?) folk do likewise with their own particular bête noire threads.

Hey, perhaps I should become a moderator, and decide which threads are boring for everyone else. :wink:

IMO if a thread's not offensive, not spam, and not straying into legally/commercially sensitive areas, there's no valid reason to close it down. A gentle message, nudging folk back on-topic and away from the flames, would be far more sensible.

[Dreadful Scathe]

So the questions are:

1. How much censorship / moderation do we as a forum want?
2. What are the most effective tools for the job?


1. Only enough that conversations remain civil.
2. I suggest euthanasia


lets face it, the thread was getting a tiny weeny bit Boring

Did it? Can't say I noticed :whistle:


I didn't feel it had gone too far though clearly there were intractable differences of opinion between some of the contributors (though no more so than on the recent 'Without God' thread).

Absolutely. There have been a few religion related threads, as well as many threads with either Rocky vs Everyone or Andy McGregor vs everyone that have been much less civil than the one in question here.



I think that it might be useful if we got a "Circles Warning" from a moderator for threads that become a bit repetitive - even just that "might" get us back on topic.

But why? There are many threads that become boring and people naturally stop reading them or posting to them. I would have suggested the life of this grammar one had approximately 2 days of effective life left. maximum. And if theres anything more boring than a thread on grammar, it has to be any thread on moderation. So now THIS thread is FAR more deserving of closure than the one we are talking about !


On the other hand - Franck would have to employ far more moderators - after all getting off topic is our favourite hobby

They are "employed" ? Is it minimum wage ? :)


I does feel like a bit of a fascist tool that can stifle debate (if you can call the last few posts debate) but to be honest I never felt more grateful to see an end of a thread :clap::clap:(help have I now become pro fascist:eek:)

although i was making jokes in it, I'd actually stopped reading it yesterday. Why would you be bothered about the "end of the thread"? just stop reading it :confused:

[tsh]

Well, as with TV, the option is always to avoid watching that channel/thread :grin: .


The forum has an 'ignore list' which makes avoiding some of the tedium easier.

[martingold]

I'll wear them for Berko on Sunday, perfect for a tango (well my style of tango anyway).
wear em tonight at ware as well :yum:

[David Bailey]

You did. Here is the evidence (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showpost.php?p=497422&postcount=230)
Oh yes, so I did - I'd forgotten.


You certainly seem to enjoy a selective memory.
That seems a bit harsh - I said I couldn't recall, and I couldn't. Are you implying something?

[Stuart M]

But why? There are many threads that become boring and people naturally stop reading them or posting to them. I would have suggested the life of this grammar one had approximately 2 days of effective life left. maximum. And if theres anything more boring than a thread on grammar, it has to be any thread on moderation. So now THIS thread is FAR more deserving of closure than the one we are talking about !
Yes. I'm writing a PM requesting - nay, demanding in the strongest terms - that this boring thread be closed now :whip:

The forum has an 'ignore list' which makes avoiding some of the tedium easier.
I'm well aware of it, and one of the useful things about the thread now closed was that it helped me decide on some changes to my own.

[martingold]

I think this thread could do with a button to close it before it starts to become too personal after all we know djb is a sensative sort be nice to him people

[Lou]

There is no 'conspiracy why'.


I don't think anyone is suggesting there is*! Anyway, I'm definitely not! :)


My point is simple (as am I ;) ), but I'll make it again, just so that you realise there's no hidden agenda.
:)



You already have a feature that is far more sophisticated than in most other forums. I've always been impressed at how enlightened it is. It has the advantage of allowing folks to vent off steam, whilst removing those threads that have descended beyond hope of redemption into a separate area where they eventually wither & die.
And they do. It works.


By simply closing a thread you lose the ability for venting. Frustrations will appear elsewhere on the forum where they are more visible to all (for example, this particular closed thread quickly spawned 3 new threads - 2 of which formed this very thread). Ironically, that thread seemed to be in its deaththrows anyway, so closing it has probably added to its lifespan.


It just seems odd to me that you'd take such a backwards step.

*unless I'm missing something**!

** like a conspiracy? ;)

[Maxine]

Well, as with TV, the option is always to avoid watching that channel/thread :grin: .

Personally, I'd rather decide what threads are boring for myself, rather than let the mods decide it for me. That's what I already do with most of the "Who's going where this weekend?" and various games threads. And I'm sure lots of (most?) folk do likewise with their own particular bête noire threads.

I had stopped reading most of it but it was getting on my nerves coming up in my unread threads so just occasionally dipped in and at the then instantly regretted it, you would have thought I’d learnt but I did it a couple of times:doh:




although i was making jokes in it, I'd actually stopped reading it yesterday. Why would you be bothered about the "end of the thread"? just stop reading it :confused:

I tried but I am weak

[philsmove]

I think this thread could do with a button to close it before it starts to become too personal after all we know djb is a sensative sort be nice to him people


better still



I think this thread could do with a button to close it before it starts

[Trouble]

although i was making jokes in it, I'd actually stopped reading it yesterday. Why would you be bothered about the "end of the thread"? just stop reading it :confused:

nah you cant do that. Its like car crash television. You dont wanna watch it but ya just cant help yourself. :sick:

[Franck]

It just seems odd to me that you'd take such a backwards step.

*unless I'm missing something**!

** like a conspiracy? ;)Well, yes, but I wouldn't have been sure it was a backward step until we tried it and got your (and other's) feedback...

As I mentioned many fora that I contribute to and respect greatly use this feature a lot, so it was worth investigating its usefulness or otherwise.

Seeing the reaction on this thread I think we'll probably re-open the original thread and keep in mind the views on this thread when using the 'close thread' feature in the future!

[David Bailey]

I tried but I am weak
Weak and wearing jackboots? :yum:

Getting better and better :D

[ant]

Not that I have experience of your side of the fence, but if 95% of what you do is censorship, I suggest you're doing it wrong. (Active spam deletion potentially excepted, if a lot more of that happens than I'm aware of).

To use a 'bouncer' analogy, yeah, bouncers can get physical. But a good bouncer tries to stop it ever getting that far.

On this forum, I know there are times when I could have done with a mod giving a gentle nudge saying "You're going a bit far - wanna tone it down?". But this never seems to happen, instead the mods wait for things to blow up and then start deleting and infracting.

In the thread under discussion, I would have preferred a "Cool it guys, or we'll have to close the thread" warning before it was closed (although I was personally pretty much done with it anyhow).

Just my $0.02c.

I go along with that.

But to be fair I did get that nudge earlier on in the thread from DB. It did work for a while but I then got the better of myself.

Sorry mate.

[DavidB]

Learning Tango, ironically.
I was trying to figure out what this meant.

Is it teaching people to do loads of moves, ignoring technique, and then dancing with everybody and anybody. The intention being that they do exactly the opposite.


Or maybe this is just an ironic dance forum?

[Dreadful Scathe]

Or maybe this is just an ironic dance forum?

I think Mr Baileys irony can be really ironic sometimes :)

[Lost Leader]

If it helps, I reckon you're look really :yum: in jackboots... :wink:

Well clearly just the mere thought of it severely compromised your use of english :lol:

[Gojive]

Basically, the Forum's one big messy Petri dish :D
It's because our dancers are just so cultured :na:

[martingold]

It's because our dancers are just so cultured :na:
ouch :lol: