User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » Feedback »

Why lock threads?


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
Why lock threads?
Page 1 of 2 [1] 2  Next Thread Tools
darshu
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
 
2004-07-29, 15:56

I've been on the Internet since before the Web an I've read the old .com for a long time and have been here pretty much since AN started and I've noticed the same thread emerge here that I simply don't understand.

Why do people want threads locked, when they aren't duplicates and in the proper forum? Why does it matter if people are flaming each other by saying Bush is stupid or what not. In my experience people eventually get tired of it and move on. If you don't like reading the the thread than don't read it, is my opinion.

I have no problem telling someone that I think they're an idiot because they like Bush and then complementing them on some juicy Apple rumour they come up with a day later. Nor will I feel the need to ignore peoples comments about Mac-related material if they flame me for my political or religious beliefs.

In my view, if you are going to have an "off-topic" forum such as AppleOutsider, than anything that is off-topic should be allowed therein. If I got sick of political threads or religious threads or what not, I'd simply stop reading them, it's fairly obvious what the thread is about if it include words such as "Bush, Kerry, Jesus, Christianity, etc" in the title.

So I'm just interested in seeing some honest opinions on why people feel the need to suppress such threads with locking. I was always amused at .com by the crazy (in my opinion) rantings of Fellowship, for instance, in Fireside Chat.

Do people actually have that hard a time distinguishing between the wacko (in their opinion) political, religious or otherwise beliefs of a person, and then their potentially credulous rumours on Apple products. I don't think most people have a hard time telling that someone who may be perfectly in line with their political, religious, whatever, beliefs may be completely talking out of their ass when they claim they have some "Insider Source" that CONFIRMS there will be G17 PowerBooks tomorrow for only $3.
  quote
Kickaha
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2004-07-29, 16:05

In my opinion, if you're going to go off on someone for their political views, there are plenty of forums out there dedicated to just that. Go for it.

No one here has a right to be an asshat... we've all been invited to a privately owned forum. It's not a public space. Your right to free speech does not apply here.

Simply put, it's called acting like a civilized human being. Too few have any clue what that may be like, since they can't seem to exercise it in their own lives. Personally, I like the lack of idiotic flaming here, and appreciate the crackdowns when people just start acting like righteous tards.
  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2004-07-29, 16:06

We like to promote a pleasant browsing experience for everyone here. If you're at a party, and there are groups of people standing around chatting with each other, are you going to ask the guests to just look the other way when one of the groups gets into a huge brawl? No, you'd try to break up the fight to keep it nice for everyone.

Here it's a bit different because you choose which threads to read and which to ignore. But what if I'm having a good discussion in a particular thread and then all of a sudden I come back after a few hours and see that it has all gone to shit?

We try not to lock any threads without good reason, or without giving warning. I locked one earlier today after warning people to cool it down, because they didn't. If you have an issue with a particular action taken by a mod or admin, please let them know via private messaging. Threads CAN be reopened, and posts CAN be deleted, so if you make a case for a locked thread being salvageable, we'll take a stab at it.

For users browsing the fourms, the only way to tell the content of a thread without opening it is to read the title. If the thread goes off topic, it can be confusing or a waste of time because the title doesn't match the content. If there are a bunch of people arguing, it can suck the person into the argument, making it worse.

Well, I have to get moving on, but if there's a specific problem you want to discuss, please send me a private message.
  quote
thuh Freak
Finally broke the seal
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2004-07-29, 19:45

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luca
Here it's a bit different because you choose which threads to read and which to ignore. But what if I'm having a good discussion in a particular thread and then all of a sudden I come back after a few hours and see that it has all gone to shit?
yea. case in point: the bush is on antidepressants thread. it didn't get too out of hand (atleast i didn't see anything terrible), but its always kind of annoying (to me atleast) when threads go off topic. and when a thread is hijacked by some dickweeds who just want to yell at each other, then you can't have a free discussion of ideas or thoughts. they get drowned out by the vitriol. sometimes locking a thread is all u can do.
  quote
DMBand0026
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
 
2004-07-29, 20:45

I'm pretty sure, and correct me if I'm wrong please, that the aforementioned Bush thread was locked because some people aren't mature enough to have a civilized conversation. Comments regarding Bush's leadership skills due to his possible use of anti-depressants, and jabs at Kerry's leadership abilities for no apparent reason at all. It's stupid, and personally, I applaud the mods for locking that flamefest in the making.

Come waste your time with me
  quote
SKMDC
superkaratemonkeydeathcar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: chicago
Send a message via AIM to SKMDC  
2004-07-29, 21:16

i think this all should be handled via P/M to your favorite moderator/killa MC!
  quote
scratt
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: M-F: Thailand Weekends : F1 2010 - Various Tracks!
Send a message via Skype™ to scratt 
2004-07-29, 21:56

It's interesting to note that certain regulars managed to keep their posts in the locked threads... but others who aren't so prolific on this forum got there's cut...

To be honest the content of the new locked thread is less interesting, has more profanities and a whole lot more childish that it was when I saw it last night. Very sad indeed. Is this Apple Forums?

sigh. Off to find another forum now.

'Remember, measure life by the moments that take your breath away, not by how many breaths you take'
Extreme Sports Cafe | ESC's blog | scratt's blog | @thescratt
  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2004-07-29, 22:31

Scratt, I did not even pay attention to people's usernames when deleting the off-topic posts. I went through and looked at each post, and deleted the ones that were off-topic or contained personal attacks. If the "regulars" kept more posts than the "new" members, then it is because their posts steered clear of the political bashing.

If it's political wars you want, then this isn't the forum for you.
  quote
scratt
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: M-F: Thailand Weekends : F1 2010 - Various Tracks!
Send a message via Skype™ to scratt 
2004-07-29, 22:49

Hi Luca,

No offense is meant toward you personally. It did rather seem that certain peoples posts which were no more on topic or off topic than mine were left whilst mine and others were deleted. I presume it is a point of view thing though. I am not here for 'political wars'.

My comment was no better or worse about Bush than any others and my comment on Anti-depressants was definitely on topic and relevant as we are incresingly seeing cases of problems with long term use of anti-depresants. I firmly believe they are a chemical band-aid for a problem which can be better dealt with personal attention to the mind, rather than in the blood stream.

I accept your reply and take it on good faith, however I maintain that I am agrieved that I was censored (in my opinion) whilst being on topic and no more acid or cutting than other members. I would ask that perhaps my comment could be reinstated. It certainly would not lower the level of the current content of that thread in a any way. But obviously that is up to you.

I came here as I wanted a little more freedom than that offered in the official Apple forums. I am not convinced that is the case anymore. This thread seems to bear out that I am not the only one of that opinion.

I also think that if you read through the locked thread as it is now it is childish and purile and serves little purpose. Perhaps better to delete the whole thing if you are going to censor it at all.

My best regards,
scratt.

'Remember, measure life by the moments that take your breath away, not by how many breaths you take'
Extreme Sports Cafe | ESC's blog | scratt's blog | @thescratt
  quote
autodata
hustlin
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2004-07-29, 23:04

personally, I think the mods have done a wonderful job. I haven't seen any evidence of mod favoritism, even though I had an ellen feiss moment when I lost a really good post to some indiscriminate deletion.

I actually really like that annoying posts get deleted, so long as they are done surgically. It's so nice to go through a once flaming thread and see people talking civilly. It's so much better than sifting through annoying, content-less posts.
  quote
scratt
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: M-F: Thailand Weekends : F1 2010 - Various Tracks!
Send a message via Skype™ to scratt 
2004-07-29, 23:07

Absolutely. I agree with you totally.

That is my point.

Have a read of the thread as it stands now. It is pretty purile!

Ah well.
scratt
  quote
autodata
hustlin
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2004-07-29, 23:12

That thread was going so downhill as soon as ___ started trolling. Deleting that stuff was a no-brainer. There was already one other poster who tried to jump on the bandwagon an off-topic smart-ass political remark.
  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2004-07-30, 00:21

scratt, I've restored most of your post - I only edited out one small part in the interest of preventing a continuation of the flame-war.

I want to make it clear that what I'm doing is not rampant censorship (not that I'm prohibited from doing that should I so choose ), it is merely keeping people from fighting. As I said before, if this was a physical get-together and there were people fighting physically, I'd break them up, but I wouldn't prevent people from talking about the issue they were fighting over. I just wouldn't let them get to the point of fighting again.

Take a look at some of the larger, more leniently moderated message boards. MacNN... AppleInsider... Apple's discussion forums... all seem to be overrun with idiots spewing crap at each other. Sure, there's plenty of mature and valuable discussion going on, but it's drowned out by the losers. AppleNova is trying to be as good a community as possible, and it's absolutely impossible to be perfect for everyone, so some people will end up being left in the lurch. In the case of a derailed thread with people fighting, some will applaud the use of moderation and pruning the thread to leave only the on-topic parts, while others will call this censorship and insist the fighting be allowed. I think that it benefits more people to have reasonably moderated discussion - we don't want to end up like AppleInsider, where political brawls have overtaken every discussion in their non-Apple forum, and they have actually had to resort to creating a special political discussion forum to curb the fighting and flame fests.

Anyway, there's nothing I can do to keep you here if you want to leave. If you don't like our policies, we're not about to change them because of one person. I am glad that you at least understand my position on this and haven't gotten angry at me specifically for it.

Hopefully that should be enough information on my view of the situation for people. If anyone still has a problem that's bugging them, it would probably be better to take it to the private messaging system. But I'll leave this open because some concerns are more general and concern many people at once, and because it would just be too damn ironic for this thread to be locked .
  quote
scratt
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: M-F: Thailand Weekends : F1 2010 - Various Tracks!
Send a message via Skype™ to scratt 
2004-07-30, 00:37

Hi Luca,

Thanks a lot.

I am not trying to lengthen this thread and in future I will use private messaging if I have any issues with moderation.

But I did just want to say thanks publically and let you know (as well as any other interested parties) I appreciate your even handedness and have taken note of all of your comments.

I definitely will stick around. It's pretty cool here.

Thanks once again.. and have a good weekend.
scratt

'Remember, measure life by the moments that take your breath away, not by how many breaths you take'
Extreme Sports Cafe | ESC's blog | scratt's blog | @thescratt
  quote
SteveC
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Boston
 
2004-07-30, 10:26

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha
No one here has a right to be an asshat... we've all been invited to a privately owned forum. It's not a public space. Your right to free speech does not apply here.
By that definition, free speech does not exist anywhere. Everything is "owned," either by a citizen or the government. As such, both are within their "rights" to not allow anybody to speak.

The "right" to free speech also requires the "obligation" to listen. Listening to things that you have never considered before, and especially to people you disagree with, is the purpose of free speech.

Decorum and politeness (moral taboo) naturally shape what, how and when we say things, but to suggest that a spirited debate should not take place because you disagree with the points made is patently false. Your right to privacy is an obligation to not intrude into somebody else's private area. A forum is not a "private" area. It exists for the purpose of exchanging views.

If a forum is meant to be a place of perpetual adoration, like a King's court, then something is seriously amiss. The question, "why lock threads?" is very valid. It is the vain-glory of a ruler that thinks the peasants are not capable of ruling themselves. I had hoped we settled that question a long time ago.

Democracy is a bumpy road, but without free speech it is a dead-end.
  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2004-07-30, 10:44



A business can choose to allow only whites if they want. We could choose to lock any thread with the word "peanut butter" in the title if we wanted. The Constitution applies to the government - it is a document outlining how the government is to be run. It is not a book of laws that the citizens must abide by.

I know what your point is, that even if we're not forced to allow everything, we should anyway. But that would make for an awful experience for people who want to get something out of browsing the forums. Would you really want all the fights and flame wars to go unmoderated?
  quote
Kickaha
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2004-07-30, 11:01

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveC
By that definition, free speech does not exist anywhere. Everything is "owned," either by a citizen or the government. As such, both are within their "rights" to not allow anybody to speak.
Oh brother. Private property = owned by an individual. Public property = owned by the collective population under the auspices of the state. Simple enough?

Quote:
The "right" to free speech also requires the "obligation" to listen. Listening to things that you have never considered before, and especially to people you disagree with, is the purpose of free speech.
Now *THAT* is utter bullcrock. There is NO 'obligation' to listen. No one is required to listen to every bit of drivel that is spewed, thank god. I believe strongly in free speech and debate *in public and on public issues*... but I also believe in being *allowed* to walk away from the idiots. What you're advocating isn't free speech, it's chaos. An open mind is one thing. Letting it fall out from lack of any restraint whatsoever, however, is to be avoided.

Quote:
Decorum and politeness (moral taboo) naturally shape what, how and when we say things, but to suggest that a spirited debate should not take place because you disagree with the points made is patently false.
No one said any such thing. The disagreement is over the tone, not the material. Certain subjects seem to bring out the worst in people, and are therefore highly suspect and moderated more closely. This is called experience.

Quote:
Your right to privacy is an obligation to not intrude into somebody else's private area. A forum is not a "private" area. It exists for the purpose of exchanging views.
It is privately owned, privately funded, and privately run. I'm sorry, what definition of 'private' were you falsely working under? Perhaps that can clear that up? 'Private' as in 'private property'. As in 'owner sets the rules'.

Quote:
If a forum is meant to be a place of perpetual adoration, like a King's court, then something is seriously amiss. The question, "why lock threads?" is very valid. It is the vain-glory of a ruler that thinks the peasants are not capable of ruling themselves. I had hoped we settled that question a long time ago.
New to the net, are you?

I've yet to see a poorly or non-moderated forum *not* degenerate into a screaming match with children. This is not a country, this is a private server paid for with private funds. Free speech is not a right in this circumstance. The owners can ban, moderate, censor, edit, and modify any thread or user that they wish. And you can choose not to enter. See? Freedom of choice, both ways.

Quote:
Democracy is a bumpy road, but without free speech it is a dead-end.
This isn't a democracy, this is a private server. Don't get your panties in a bunch over something that doesn't apply here.
  quote
SteveC
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Boston
 
2004-07-30, 11:20

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luca
Would you really want all the fights and flame wars to go unmoderated?
Yes, because even if people are screaming at each other, at some point their anger will be spent. Meanwhile, everybody else can learn from their expressions of anger (hopefully not to form a mob and attack the other.)

You either trust that man can be governed by reason or you don't. The very act of fearing to trust reason is an act of emotion, thus becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy of people's unwillingness to "get along."

It is an extremely slippery slope, and that is why democracies slip into fascism. The intent is ALWAYS honorable. It is an attempt to keep things pure and neat. But the effect is just the opposite, it promotes authoritarianism, censorship and hard feelings.

At wilwheaton.net there have been passionate pointed debates with less and less moderation. People are complex, it takes a long time to actually understand what is being said, because what is said is OFTEN not what is heard. That is what makes authority so hypocritical. The agenda to "play nice" is to not play at all. It makes a bland pointless conversation where there is no exchange of ideas. It is a proclamation of complacency.

People learn by arguing with each other. A heated debate, even laden with personal attacks, is still a debate. For people to learn how to debate without resorting to personal attacks, then they need the freedom to make mistakes. Yes, it is paradoxical, but every new idea is born as heresy. When Jobs and Woz walked into their garage, most people would say they were nuts, but they had a different vision. If they were not allowed to communicate it, what then? The Sons of Liberty had a radical idea in overthrowing the king. Were they right? Were they wrong? Probably both, since we are not living in Nirvana. But how?

Without debate, we will never know how.

There is no place for censorship anywhere in society, there is however a place for decorum, moral taboo and commonsense, and that is our individual obligation and duty to promote. Temperment is as important as content. Address the temperment, but don't censor it or rearrange people's words. That was Winston Smith's job in the Department of Truth in Orwell's 1984.
  quote
autodata
hustlin
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2004-07-30, 11:27

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveC
Yes, because even if people are screaming at each other, at some point their anger will be spent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha
I've yet to see a poorly or non-moderated forum *not* degenerate into a screaming match with children.
listen to kickaha.

Steve, what you advocate is great in theory, but the real world has proven time and time and time and time and time and time again that it doesn't work out that way.
  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2004-07-30, 11:27

Oh brother, spare me the 1984 bullshit.

Kickaha explained it well. We're not a government. We're a privately owned message board. And I think we're doing a good job of breaking up fights while still allowing discussion of anything people want to discuss.
  quote
SteveC
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Boston
 
2004-07-30, 12:41

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luca
Oh brother, spare me the 1984 bullshit.
Quick, call the censor! People are not playing nice.

Who watches those who are doing the watching? Isn't this the same issue as the border guard who beat up the Chinese national for no reason?

Authority corrupts, but it is wielded unjustly in places other than government. The people themselves are unjust, which is why bigotry, racism and economic isolation exist.

Didn't this forum come into existence for the same reason of somebody not wanting to hear an opposing view?
  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2004-07-30, 13:17

You know what? You're being an asshole. And yet I'm not locking this thread, deleting all records of it, and banning you. Why? Because I'm not the corrupt, unjust, bigoted authoritarian you seem to think I am.



I've heard your "opposing view" quite enough today. Do you automatically call anyone who has any power "corrupt" just because they wield it reasonably? Is it unreasonable for me to ask people to follow the posting guidelines of this site? Are the posting guidelines themselves unjust? Are you going to rebel?

If you didn't keep up with the origins of this website, it started because the people in power actually DID abuse their power. They banned people without warning, they erased any discussion relating to the situation, and they even started monitoring their own "private" messaging system. In every case I've seen so far here, the power to lock threads, delete posts and ban members has only been used to uphold the posting guidelines. Plus, the locked threads here are kept around so people can at least read an account of what happened. We're not trying to silence people. If we wanted to cut people off from information, we could easily remove any trace of a controversial thread as if it never existed.

So as you can see, I'm creating an analogy to a government. AppleNova is our country, and the posting guidelines are our laws. When someone breaks the law, we take action to set things straight. I guess what you're saying is you'd prefer an anarchist state, with no government and no laws. If that's what you want, there are plenty of places on the internet where you can find that sort of thing.
  quote
Kickaha
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2004-07-30, 13:21

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveC
The people themselves are unjust, which is why bigotry, racism and economic isolation exist.
Excellent reason for moderate moderation... which I believe exists here quite nicely.

People are, to put it bluntly, a cowardly and rather stupid lot in general. Anonymity of net access combined with a complete lack of internal editorial control result in endless flame wars when 'those noble peasants' are left to their own devices for too long.

Broken window theory - familiar with it? Better to lop off a small branch here and there now, rather than have to till entire forests under later. And you're right, the Recent Unpleasantness was an example to bring up - although not quite in the way you were thinking. That was an example of a forest getting tilled under.

Politeness and civility are learned traits, as is the ability to have intelligent discourse from opposing but respectful views. I do not think it in any way infringing on anyone's supposed 'rights' for the moderators here to request that if someone wishes to partake of their boards, that they act appropriately, as if a guest in their house. Because for all intents and purposes, that's exactly what we all are here. Guests.

And every host has the right and the obligation to ask obnoxious or disruptive guests to leave their property.
  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2004-07-30, 13:23

Better analogy than mine, Kickaha. Unfortunately, I realized that one of my posts was saying we're not a government and the next compared us to one. Your "guests in the house" analogy is better. Also, I think what I meant by my "we're not a government" comment is that we're not part of the US government, so we're not bound by the Constitution.
  quote
SteveC
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Boston
 
2004-07-30, 14:11

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luca
You know what? You're being an asshole. And yet I'm not locking this thread, deleting all records of it, and banning you. Why? Because I'm not the corrupt, unjust, bigoted authoritarian you seem to think I am.
Whoa! I never said any such thing, I haven't called you a name, or characterized you in any way. I have simply been discussing the issue of locking threads and how trying to control other people's behavior usually creates more chaos than it was intended to prevent.

Because you are in authority, you are assuming I am talking about you. I'm not. I am talking about authority in general in the same way you are talking about guests and rights in general.

This is the "I think according to where I sit" syndrome. You can ask city hall to do something, and they will refuse because of a myriad of reasons, but if you know somebody, then it gets taken care of immediately. All the high principles and marketplace theories go out the window instantly. What actually changed? Temperment. One person is viewed as a friend and another as a stranger. Sometimes the only way strangers can become friends is to have a disagreement. They can have an honest disagreement, but if they can't talk it out and find consensus then they just stew and think the other is an idiot, when neither person is. Does that make sense?

Friends?
  quote
Brad
Selfish Heathen
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Zone of Pain
 
2004-07-30, 15:30

Steve, if you have any question as to how this board is run, the first place you should check is the Posting Guidelines page.

Quote:
The right (if you are an American citizen) to free speech as guaranteed by the 1st amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not apply when posting at this message board. AppleNova is a privately owned and operated forum. Posters are allowed a great deal of flexibility in their posts, but be respectful of other members and the guidelines.
So, basically, if you don't play nice, you can just take your ball and go home. We allow a great deal of leniency in the discussions here, but once you cross the lines of common decency or violate the guidelines, you've gone too far.

Quote:
AppleOutsider is not a forum to spew vitriol against people, organizations, or theologies. AppleOutsider is for serious discussions; so, the moderators and administrators expect a level of maturity from all members at all times.
That includes ad-hominem attacks on politicians, religious figures, and other public figures in general. Blatantly calling Bush or Kerry an idiot, for example, falls into this category. Comments like this don't serve to foster meaningful discussion and instead fuel rage and arguments between opposing views.

You can flaunt the notion of an ideal discussion environment where free speech reigns completely unrestricted, but that is not how we run this site. Pornography, hate speech, and piracy may be acceptable as "free speech", but you won't find shops on every street corner where you can openly debate and parade around about these subjects.

It is up to the moderators' discretion to decide if a subject is suitable for discussion here. We the administrators chose a small group of moderators (after weeks of observation) whom we believed to be very level-headed folks with good judgment on these sorts of issues.

If you don't like how this works, AppleNova may not be for you. I'm sure there are plenty of other sites on the Internet at your disposal for discussing topics that are taboo here.

To address a specific...
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveC
Yes, because even if people are screaming at each other, at some point their anger will be spent.
I take it you haven't spent a lot of time in other political discussions with seriously stubborn blockheads. I've seen online arguments go back and forth for weeks on end that eventually lost sight of the original subject and devolved into personal attacks on the members of the discussion. You think this solves anything? How long should this be allowed to go on? Weeks? Months?

Look at this in a broader global view: when will Palestine and Israel's anger be spent? What about Iraq or North Korea or other countries around the world? In the real world, people can be angry and dead-set against something for their whole life. Does that mean we shouldn't do anything to stop groups of people from bombing each other? After all, "at some point their anger will be spent" right? Yeah, I guess it will be when they're all dead.

We as a forum are our own small society that mirrors the "real world" in many respects. People flaming and lashing out in threads is comparable to the above activities in the real world. If people aren't restrained in these situations, they will only incite more problems and make the forums "unlivable" by anyone but the angry zealots.

The quality of this board depends on the quality of the posts. The only way to guarantee thoughtful, informative discussion is to write thoughtful, informative posts. AppleNova is not a real-time chat forum. You have time to compose messages and edit them before and after posting.
  quote
Powerdoc
Cat's Dreamlands
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2004-07-30, 15:41

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luca

If you didn't keep up with the origins of this website, it started because the people in power actually DID abuse their power. They banned people without warning, they erased any discussion relating to the situation, and they even started monitoring their own "private" messaging system. In every case I've seen so far here, the power to lock threads, delete posts and ban members has only been used to uphold the posting guidelines. Plus, the locked threads here are kept around so people can at least read an account of what happened. We're not trying to silence people. If we wanted to cut people off from information, we could easily remove any trace of a controversial thread as if it never existed.
You are always the tyrant of someone else. It's all a matter of perception.

Steve C : what Kickaha said. If you want a free for all forum, there are some : personally it's not the type of place, where I want to go, but you are free to go there. But you canno't bend this place that do not belong to you at your owns wills.
  quote
darshu
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
 
2004-07-30, 17:58

This thread seems to have turned into an interesting mess, not entirely the one I had intendend though. I apologize in advance for my lack of quotes, but there are just too many pieces to quote.

I definitely appreciate the existence of moderation, for anything too off-topic definitely should be dealt with, same with spamming or duplication or whatnot. Not to mention huge streams of endless profanity and insults. However, I don't believe that a "heated discussion" need necessarily be prohibited.

I have no particular thread to complain about, but I'm just curious about the issue in general. Perhaps part of the problem is that threads of contentious issues do last longer, regardless of the amount of, or lack thereof, of flaming since people have more to say about contentious topics. Other than the occasional entertaining thread, such as the one which led me to that hilarious Nutrigrain commercial, I find contentious issues to be more engaging.

Now please note that I actually seldom post, I usually prefer to lurk, and that I definitely do advocate the use of moderation on issues that would otherwise make the forum unusable. I don't come to AppleNova to read about political issues or movies or what someone had for breakfast, I come here to read about and talk about Apple and Apple-related things. I read AppleOutsider, mainly because it exists, and it is interesting to see other sides of the people who you are conversing with.

I simply question the existence of such a forum that covers (everything non-apple) if certain subjects are taboo. There certainly is a difference as well between contentious issues and personal attacks. Personally, I dislike Bush, I don't particularly like Kerry either, but then again I'm also not an American, I'm a Canadian. I would not be offended by a "Bush is dumb" thread or a "Kerry is dumb" or for that matter a "Prime Minister Paul Martin is dumb" thread, although admittedly, such threads may possible be "dumb" . But I think there is a clear difference between a thread like that and a thread titled "Anyone who supports candidate X is a complete moron and waste of skin". One is a topic regarding candidate X and the other is an insult to the supporters of candidate X. Presumably Candidate X does not read AppleNova.

Anyways, I don't have any particular beef, I'm not arguing that the moderators are oppressive or anything like that, I just simply think the practice is overused and not entirely done with good reason. I question the value of something like AppleOutsider if everyone is restricted to topics which don't cause controversy.

Anyways just my extra 2 cents.
  quote
SteveC
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Boston
 
2004-07-30, 18:35

I'm not trying to bend or break any rules, I am just offering an opinion.

I think I stated that

"there is however a place for decorum, moral taboo and commonsense,"

but since I have my panties in a knot, my opionion is BS, and I am an a-hole, I just wonder how objectively the original post was understood. I think some very good questions were posed, and they were not really explored beyond "we think we are doing it the right way."

The original question was:
So I'm just interested in seeing some honest opinions on why people feel the need to suppress such threads with locking.

It was not necessarily directed to the mods, as users are usually the ones to complain. The mods tend to take a more tolerant view of things, since they see more of it.

For me, however, I also look at Apple and Steve Jobs and the slogan of Think Different and I wonder if anybody really understands the poster boys that are used in the ad campaign. Those "heroes" really did think different. I wonder if genius isn't more than being a corporate whore after you are dead and can no longer defend yourself. How did they Think Different if they were not free to disagree?

I also wonder if Mac users think different from windows users. But I guess that would be a different topic.

In any case, I am not trying to present myself as an "angry zealot." I am just trying to explore the question that was asked. I do agree with the original poster, darshu, that people can generally work it out on their own if left to their own devices. A "lost" thread here and there, to me, isn't worth "protecting." You can learn a lot from listening to what and how people argue (which is why I hate to see mods alter the conversation). Sometimes the angry example teaches more than their words themselves, regardless of whether you agree or disagree.
  quote
Windswept
On Pacific time
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Moderator's Pub
 
2004-07-30, 18:53

I have to say that there were many times at AppleInsider/AO when I was reading a thread with great interest, and then one or two people (of the many who were participating) proceeded to insult each other. After a few exchanges between the two, suddenly the entire thread was locked, despite the fact that no one else was involved in that particular altercation.

I personally wouldn't do that. I would prefer to deal with the two offenders, at first publically in the thread, and possibly with a quick PM to each. If they continued to offend, I would delete their posts - NOT lock the entire thread. If they jumped right back in and started up again, I would seek to ban them for a day or two (or more, depending on the nature of their offense).

If they can't manage to use their posting privileges wisely, then they deserve to lose them for a time.

At AI/AO, I *really* did get annoyed on many an occasion when a thread was locked unnecessarily (imo); so *I* wouldn't want to do that here. But I think the male mods at AppleNova have a better sense than I do for when things are getting out of hand. I think I'm probably entirely too laissez-faire. (eek!)

Sorry about that, fellow mods. I'll start cracking my whip one of these days.
  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 1 of 2 [1] 2  Next

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Threads not marked as read DMBand0026 Feedback 8 2004-07-15 14:41
More Poop Threads Needed? Moogs AppleOutsider 4 2004-06-30 05:35


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:34.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2024, AppleNova