Advanced  

Latest Result

Grand Final MCG
Sat, 29 Sep 2018 • 12:00 WST
West Coast Collingwood
11.13 (79) 11.8 (74)
Game Focus



Locking Threads?

Feedback on the new look and feel. Please be as detailed as possible to help with any projected changes

Moderators: Mead, Mr Q, Goldenblue

Locking Threads?

Postby Crazy Dazz on Thu Oct 09, 2008 1:35 am

Not sure I'm convinced of the logic behind Thread Locking.
Certainly it is warranted where there's a legal issue, or the whole thread is in violation of EFH policy.
Perhaps there's grounds when a thread gets completely and hopelessly de-railed, but even then I think it should be taken back to the behaviour of individuals.
However it seems to be widely applied when a mod decides that people should nolonger be able to comment on a particular issue? In Mr Q's case that's fine upto a point, it is "his" site after all.
However it occurs to me that if someone is really that intolerant, then being a mod must be pure torture.

Maybe it's just me and my strange view of the world, but I find it crazy that so many people want to repeatedly jump into threads just to say "oh this debate has gone on long enough, it's all been said, you should all stop now" and then start saying "lock this thread please." Then ultimately a mod with the same view comes along and does exactly that.

I've heard the argument that repetitive posts spoil EFH and turn people off, but I just don't understand that. I drop in when I have the time or want to discuss something, if a thread looks interesting I read it, and if I feel the urge I post a reply. If I'm sick of reading about something (eg the Kerr debate,) then I simply don't. I can certainly understand that people eventually tired of the "I hate Judd" threads, and that many are sick and tired of Ben Cousins, but isn't their solution simply to not read or contribute to those threads?

I appreciate that it can be off-putting to drop into EFH and see the board filled with threads all re-hashing the same subject, and so I don't object to thread merging when necessary, but wouldn't it serve a useful purpose to leave just one thread open to allow those who still feel the need to express their feelings?

I have always appreciated that I can drop into EFH and express my opinion (nomatter how crazy,) vent my spleen, let my emotions spill out, etc. Now it seems that privilege is subject to the (limited) patience of moderators.
Crazy Dazz
EFH Legend
 
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 5:18 pm

Re: Locking Threads?

Postby Schwayne on Thu Oct 09, 2008 6:03 am

I think when we get to page 49 of a "Bring Back Ben Cousins" type thread, there is a fair chance that we are just going around in circles. Kind of like banging your head against a wall, if you will. Everyone is going to have their own opinion on a matter such as this and I doubt that a further 49 pages would alter that opinion, so I can understand where Q is coming from.

Just my two cents.
West Coast Eagles Premiers 1992 1994 2006
Subiaco Lions Premiers 1912 1913 1915 1924 1973 1986 1988 2004 2006 2007 2008
User avatar
Schwayne
EFH Hall of Fame
 
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: Brisvegas

Re: Locking Threads?

Postby Mr Q on Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:38 pm

Well, I'd point out that the moderators get sick of the same old threads appearing again and again and again ad nauseum, and we don't have the choice of just not reading things because we're bored with the topic - in case it really goes off the rails.

In the end though, I think a lot of people are happy to just see the back of a topic - and see it off the main board as well. And the fact that people will keep re-starting the same old flame wars does encourage them to get shot down a lot quicker; it's better to try to keep some harmony around the place.

The Cousins situation is a good case in point - everyone's had their say now that's going to, and five times over. There's nothing to be gained by keeping it going. It's a moot point anyway as we know what's going to happen, and no matter what it was, some people are going to be unhappy. Even that though, people have more than had their say on. There's 1000 other things we could be talking about, I'd rather us not be hung up on one.
"I like to pay taxes. With them I buy civilisation" - Oliver Wendell Holmes
Alternative facts, alternative facts, pants on fire....
User avatar
Mr Q
EFH Posting Lunatic
 
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 8:59 pm
Location: Block 331

Re: Locking Threads?

Postby Crazy Dazz on Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:40 am

Mr Q wrote:Well, I'd point out that the moderators get sick of the same old threads appearing again and again and again ad nauseum, and we don't have the choice of just not reading things because we're bored with the topic - in case it really goes off the rails.
True, I hadn't really considered that. I can see that your jobs as mods require you to read everything, regardless of how repetative it has become.

A question though, and to use the Cousins example; Given that some people will eventually (or sometimes quite quickly) twist a thread around to rehash old ground, does that mean that we can never again discuss any issue that might reference Cousins?
Not being sarcastic here, I too find it frustrating that immediately one tries to discuss a new topic regarding Richmond and the new recruit, somebody jumps in with "we were right/wrong to get rid of him."
So rather than closing down the thread, wouldn't it be better to sanction the member who is trying to derail?
Crazy Dazz
EFH Legend
 
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 5:18 pm

Re: Locking Threads?

Postby fordy on Thu Mar 26, 2009 10:05 am

Crazy Dazz wrote:A question though, and to use the Cousins example; Given that some people will eventually (or sometimes quite quickly) twist a thread around to rehash old ground, does that mean that we can never again discuss any issue that might reference Cousins?

Of course not. If (hypothetically) Richmond was sitting on top of the ladder mid season and someone started a thread on the AFL board on how well their midfield was performing, going through each player's performance, that would be fine. If it then degenerated into "see we were wrong to get rid of Cousins" "no we were right he'll implode eventually" "no we were wrong" "no we were right" "get fucked imbecile" "get fucked moron", THEN it would be locked. (Hopefully before it reached the last 2.)
User avatar
fordy
EFH Hall of Fame
 
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 3:12 pm
Location: Is everything

Re: Locking Threads?

Postby Mr Q on Thu Mar 26, 2009 12:56 pm

Crazy Dazz wrote:So rather than closing down the thread, wouldn't it be better to sanction the member who is trying to derail?


Typically when a thread like that gets shut down, it's because I've clicked on it, found six new pages of crap, scanned through it and decided it's time. I can't be bothered assigning blame (or RFC80 would have been long banned), because that's just too time consuming. There are times I just have to cut it short or waste a whole pile of time pruning the thread and telling people off that I could use doing better things like cutting my toenails.
"I like to pay taxes. With them I buy civilisation" - Oliver Wendell Holmes
Alternative facts, alternative facts, pants on fire....
User avatar
Mr Q
EFH Posting Lunatic
 
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 8:59 pm
Location: Block 331

Re: Locking Threads?

Postby LPP on Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:03 pm

Do you prefer scissors, clippers or clippers that have that storage thingy that collect the clippings?
LPP
EFH Hall of Fame
 
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 11:53 am
Location: Over and Out

Re: Locking Threads?

Postby Mr Q on Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:44 pm

LPP wrote:Do you prefer scissors, clippers or clippers that have that storage thingy that collect the clippings?


Well I don't usually want to touch the clippings, that's for sure.
"I like to pay taxes. With them I buy civilisation" - Oliver Wendell Holmes
Alternative facts, alternative facts, pants on fire....
User avatar
Mr Q
EFH Posting Lunatic
 
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 8:59 pm
Location: Block 331


Return to EFH 2.0 Feedback Board

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest