|
calamity_chk
Nov 6, 2002, 6:43 PM
Post #101 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
*gasp*
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Nov 6, 2002, 6:43 PM
Post #102 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Nov 6, 2002, 6:43 PM
Post #103 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
cheaters !!
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Nov 6, 2002, 7:01 PM
Post #104 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
Just want to point out that old posts are not static or really archived(unless they are actually in the archive, which should just be renamed crap repository). When a post is locked and a link is given, there is nothing stopping that user or anyone else from posting in the old thread.
I think thread locking is a good thing in moderation. Linking back to truly old cobweb threads is a bad thing. However, if the topic was discussed a week or two ago and is still fresh yet not on the first page of posts i see no value whatsoever in keeping a rehash, and i think that locking and pointing out the existing thread is a service both to the website and the poster(especially if the locked thread is deleted after a few days so it doesn't keep cluttering the index up).
what do you think of that headcrak?
|
|
|
|
|
lox
Nov 6, 2002, 7:55 PM
Post #105 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2002
Posts: 2307
|
I disagree with the current amount of thread locking and topic pointing out which occurs here.
I hear statements like yours and rrrAdams and they all run together and sound like "Bitch bitch bitch, you SHOULD post this way, I SHOULD be able to lock if this and this and this, moan moan moan."
Obviously people take issue with the amount of moderation here.
Obviously people take issue with the lack of moderation.
The difference between these two groups of people is: one group wants the REST OF EVERYONE to be conform to their vision of a utopic forum, and they will never be pleased. I mean, seriously... look at the name of this thread "Moderators, wake up." You know how many mods there are, in my mind and the minds of many here, this "waking up" is crappy.
Move topics to the proper forum if you MUST or it's APPROPRIATE, but let people talk about what they want as many times as they want... if you don't like the topic or don't want to participate, then don't. If you want to participate by pointing to an older thread, go ahead, but don't effin' LOCK and DELETE for chrissakes.
It's just text into MySQL (or whatever y'all use)... it's not going to break the bank.
|
|
|
|
|
coach
Nov 6, 2002, 8:27 PM
Post #106 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2001
Posts: 3348
|
I have to agree with Headcrack on some of his points. As a Mod in Beginners I see a lot of posts that are on the same subject that someone asked about last week or last month. The point is that the poster is usually (not always) asking a question along the lines of "What do you think of ..." or "How do you feel about ..." or "How do I ...". These people aren't interested in something that was written last week, last month or last year. If they were they could pick up many of the inexpensive books on the market and find the answer. They want to hear what people think, feel or how they do something now!
Also, as I Mod I do not Lock threads but rather move them to Archive when they have been on the Forum for a year of more with no recent responses. They are always there if someone wants to read them. On the issue of Deleting, I have deleted threads that were over a year old with NO REPSONES. These were ususally the type of "Looking for a climber in ...." Maybe it is not the approved practice but if the person hasn't found a climber in a year and nobody responded what's the deal with deleting it? It may only be text but it takes space. If we never delete anything the Archives will become so cluttered that nobody will ever check it. My experiences with SEARCH have not been all that successful (maybe it's my brain) and I am sure others have had that problem and rarely use it.
Nuff Said
Climb On
|
|
|
|
|
lox
Nov 6, 2002, 9:06 PM
Post #107 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2002
Posts: 2307
|
Coach... I fully agree with your ethics.
I like your philosophy and judgement.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Nov 6, 2002, 9:09 PM
Post #108 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
Headcrak - did you even read my post? I tried to address your concerns about post locking, which I also agree is excessive. You didn't address even one thing I said.
For someone who goes on and on about critical thinking, you should try it yourself. Do you actually want a dialog about changing things, or do you just want to complain and trash adam constantly? I tried to address your concerns reasonably. I won't bother again if you respond like this.
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Nov 6, 2002, 9:20 PM
Post #109 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
Hey I want to clear something up! My nickname-flamer- has nothing to do with "flaming" on this site. This is a nickname given to me by co-workers due to large Flame tattoos that I have. When I choose this name I had no idea as to it's meaning on this site.I do not intend to be a pain in everyones ass! Maybe I should change the name so as to avoid confusion?
josh
|
|
|
|
|
lox
Nov 7, 2002, 1:37 AM
Post #110 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2002
Posts: 2307
|
Flamer... I thought it was cuz you were like,so totally gay and just OUT THERE. you know, for everyone to see...
Atg, you wrote:
Quote:I think thread locking is a good thing in moderation.
I wrote:
Quote: I disagree with the current amount of thread locking and topic pointing out which occurs here.
You wrote:
Quote:i think that locking and pointing out the existing thread is a service both to the website and the poster(especially if the locked thread is deleted after a few days so it doesn't keep cluttering the index up)
I wrote:
Quote:Move topics to the proper forum if you MUST or it's APPROPRIATE, but let people talk about what they want as many times as they want... if you don't like the topic or don't want to participate, then don't. If you want to participate by pointing to an older thread, go ahead, but don't effin' LOCK and DELETE for chrissakes.
Does this not DIRECTLY ADDRESS the points you raised ?
rhetorical.
In answer to your question, yes, I read your thread and put some thought into my response. Pity you don't see that. I suppose we could add it to the list of things we don't see eye to eye on.
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Nov 7, 2002, 1:46 AM
Post #111 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
i don't think you did address them. i wasn't referring to the current situation - i was trying to find an acceptable final solution.
what is wrong with telling people to join an existing thread if it is still current(say within a week or so)? you get more interaction with people that way as the audience for the topic isn't fractured.
|
|
|
|
|
marshall84
Nov 7, 2002, 2:51 AM
Post #112 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 9, 2002
Posts: 2842
|
A newby to the site chiming in. There have been several times that I have read a thread to get specific info, and the re-direct from a moderator has been extremely helpful. I don't necessarily need to hear from every one else about directions to j-tree or how five-tens differ from other shoes if it's already been discussed before.
A little time spent researching your topic saves everybody time. Of course then it reduces the number of chances head-crack has to flame somebody and then troll for a fight.
Relax dude.
|
|
|
|
|
lox
Nov 7, 2002, 3:52 PM
Post #113 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2002
Posts: 2307
|
Atg... I have proposed a "final solution" several times:
Point people to other threads, and then keep the new thread open, in case that conversation wants to go in a different direction.
You just happened to disagree with me.
Apparently, finding a "final solution" to you means "getting what you want."
Well, guy, that's what is going to happen. Not everyone is as thoughtful a moderator as coach is. Many of the mods think that locking and then deleting "so the forum isn't cluttered" is cool.
I happen to disagree.
I would like to be able to both meet the NOOB's needs and allow for as much freedom as possible, as I think that is what increases someone's enjoyment.
I am not advocating STOPPING pointing people at threads.
I am advocating stopping with the lock and delete.
You think it "streamlines" the forum or something... and I think that is YOUR INTERPRETATION of how a forum SHOULD look. And you have yet failed to demonstrate adequately why YOUR INTERPRETATION should be upheld as the best.
I know my way might be inconvenient at times, and you might see (GASP!) 2 topics about the same thing at the same time, perhaps even in the same forum !!!!11
From where I am sitting, YOU are the one who needs to lighten up and stop trying to tell me that it is my job to come up with a compromise or convince you I am correct. That is not my job.
I wouldn't be so shitty as to try to push my vision of how a forum should look off on other people. I will merely decry the status quo, as it stifles interaction and validates moderator powertripping.
(Check out the last post in the locked thread in this very forum to see EXACTLY what I mean.)
|
|
|
|
|
eric
Nov 7, 2002, 4:53 PM
Post #114 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2002
Posts: 1430
|
I agree with headcrak.
Users need to be given the opportunity to discuss things in their own way. Forcing them to do that on an "old" thread that may already be very long is going to restrict (but certainly not eliminate) their ability to do so.
I do think threads should be moved, but there is entirely too much locking going on.
Are we going to see a policy written up concerning this?
|
|
|
|
|
murf
Nov 7, 2002, 5:08 PM
Post #115 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 15, 2002
Posts: 1150
|
Instead of pointing folks at another thread and making them wade through it, a FAQ would answer most redundant ?'s.
what cams are best-
how do you mark the middle of a rope-
what's a keeloneawton-
Etc, etc, see tradgirl for the way to destill threads to the essence.
Note for something like climbing, where very things are absolute, an FAQ should reflect that.
Murf
[ This Message was edited by: murf on 2002-11-07 09:38 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Nov 7, 2002, 5:26 PM
Post #116 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
To murf's list...
what cams are best-
how do you mark the middle of a rope-
what's a keeloneawton-
I'd add...
How to integrate cats into your climbing-
Seasonal bolting of Double Cross-
Etc-
But, seriously, murf's right, we need a FAQ.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
lox
Nov 7, 2002, 5:40 PM
Post #117 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2002
Posts: 2307
|
Why do you need an FAQ ?!?
The point of not pointing people to old threads and locking new ones is that people get to INTERACT with the OTHER USERS on the site.
Otherwise, they could just go get a fuggin book.
It's not why they logged onto a public rockclimbign forum in the first place.
They logged on to TALK TO OTHER PEOPLE.
And FAQ would just give the mods somethign else to point the user to before locking and deleting his thread.
Please read the entire topic before posting. This has been discussed, perhaps on page 5 or 6.
|
|
|
|
|
eric
Nov 7, 2002, 6:11 PM
Post #118 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2002
Posts: 1430
|
Please read the entire website before posting. A FAQ has been discussed before. Somewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
lox
Nov 7, 2002, 6:23 PM
Post #119 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2002
Posts: 2307
|
Felonius Abusive Queerbait ?
Yeah... we talk about rrrAdam all the time.
|
|
|
|
|
jhundrup
Nov 7, 2002, 6:39 PM
Post #120 of 145
(6451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2001
Posts: 410
|
One thing to consider here....is you can't please everyone. While headcrak has some good points, so does atg.
It has been recently discussed in the moderators forum that the amount of locking and deleting has got to stop. However, some locking and deleting will still take place. A classic example of this was I posted some info about a book that I had received without looking. The same post had been started the day before with several responses. Why should there be two posts on the same topic on roughly the same day? There shouldn't and mine was locked, which I later deleted and posted to the exising thread.
I do agree that the amount of locking must decrease and the deleting must decrease as well, but it won't stop all together.
You can't please everyone, there will have to be a medium and users will have to accept that.
Jared
|
|
|
|
|
lox
Nov 7, 2002, 8:20 PM
Post #121 of 145
(6452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2002
Posts: 2307
|
I agree with that statement.
As far as deleting your own thread goes... that's a special case. If someone wantstheir thread deleted and posts to the existing thread, such as in this case... sure, delete their thread.
I think they can do this themself, though, like you did. When you do this for them, you are imposing your idea of the correct way the community should operate, and that's *a little* whack.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 7, 2002, 8:29 PM
Post #122 of 145
(6452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Where do you get "delete" from ??? We have deleted very little here, as Trevor's view is that anything (sans offensive material), no matter how old or redundant has Historical Value. We have locked many redundant threads with links to recent ones, but have not deleted them.
|
|
|
|
|
lox
Nov 7, 2002, 8:43 PM
Post #123 of 145
(6452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2002
Posts: 2307
|
Lessee how about RIGHT HERE IN JHUNDRUPS POST:
Quote:There shouldn't and mine was locked, which I later deleted and posted to the exising thread.
Or maybe here, in COACH's post:
Quote:Deleting, I have deleted threads that were over a year old with NO REPSONES
While I have no problem with the circumstance surrounding these deletions, I am proving that deleting things has been discussed on this thread for about 8 pages now.
Many people and mods think that stuff should be deleted for one reason or another.
I am against that.
That's kinda like, the point of this thread.
Saying the point is moot cuz it SHOULDN'T happen is kinda stupid, seeing as we've been discussing the merits of doing versus not doing it for a little while.
|
|
|
|
|
jhundrup
Nov 7, 2002, 9:14 PM
Post #124 of 145
(6452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2001
Posts: 410
|
Let me respond....I didn't say deleting was o.k., I did say that it needed to be greatly decreased and it should be used only for pornography and excessive profanity.
I did say that some locking was o.k. and that it also needs to be decreased somewhat. The thread I spoke of was mine, and it was simply locked. I (as the poster, not as an admin) chose to delete it and as headcrak stated, this can be done by any user.
There will never be an agreement on this by everyone. There will just have to be an agreement to disagree on some things and use the site the way it is running. Yes changes can be made, but not everything can be changed to everyone's liking.
Jared
|
|
|
|
|
andy_lemon
Nov 7, 2002, 9:33 PM
Post #125 of 145
(6452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2001
Posts: 3335
|
Damn Message Board Nazis. Let's just consolidate the message board into one forum, "General".
|
|
|
|
|
|
