One thing I particularly disagree with is the possibility of a site owner handing out moderator status like its free candy to people who may have unproven experience with such a responsibility. If some here thought my last response on the religious thread was attacking someone then that was not my intention. Even though LPspider has posted site rules of conduct I don't think I or anyone on that thread has actually broken them. No flaming was present, but a heated debate it probably was becoming. Debates are hardly ever rosy sweet. Some become very heated, but they're still constructive even if you don't personally think so. I guess a vote between mods should be instilled if choices are going to be kept fair. Consider this POV: as a moderator who feels the need to lock a thread because you as an individual with mod powers thinks that you are either upholding site rules (which you're not) or merely avoiding "potential" flaming you may in fact be attacking freedom of speech.
Or maybe they're trying to keep people happy. The forum, like any other institution, needs people to make it work, and people will only stick around if they like being there. If a religious discussion starts, that's cool, but soon it turns into a debate. A logical, thought-out, polite debate, but nonetheless, this IS a gathering of human beings, so someone is going to take offense. And then vendettas are going to be formed, and these grudges will start arguments in other topics, which will make more grudges and people will get so sick of other people that they won't want to come anymore, and the fallout and falling out will eventually cause the forum to shut down... ...so yeah. It's better to be safe than sorry. If you want to continue the debate, you could always do it in PMs, or get each other's IM accounts or e-mail addresses.
I believe that the forums need some form of structure. Every privilege comes with consequences and if the privileges are abused then there is no calm atmosphere. A heated conversation is fine, it gets our minds working overtime, but when someone pushes the envelope and causes chaos then no one can be content. What good is that?
"Better to be safe than sorry"? Oh Jeez, the amount of times I have heard that excuse. The need for moderation would be to handle the members. Why lock a whole thread that others could bring differing outlooks and opinions to? Like I said, better to be safe than sorry is more about attacking freedom of speech otherwise the effort in taking on the mod status would be to police the individuals concerned with abusing rules. If it's too inconvenient and too much work that the only lazy option would be the totalitarian one of shooting the whole discussion then I'd rather not be on a site that advocates such a mentality.
The whole point being that if the damage has been done then the reactions would be justified. But to go ahead and do it "just in case" is a p!ss-weak one.
Those are your thoughts indeed. You say that it prevents others from stating their thoughts but in reality who would? Once a debate turns into a quarrel those who are causing the chaos make the posts. The people who have the alternate opinions will keep their mouths closed for fear of being involved. In reality those quarrels spin out of control quickly and like Ivan said, if you must continue to bicker about it, then take it to a private message and leave it off of the forums.
Thank you for completely missing the point. The thread concerned hasn't spun out of control. Only one moderator thought that it would. Surely one should wait first to see whether it has. If not then there wouldn't be any point in locking a thread.
Your welcome. I was not there at the time being so I have to base my opinion off of your facts. I have been to others with like characteristics and I feel that, with good reason, they should be locked. These forums are about writing! Many people come here to read or show their own creations. They do NOT want to see others getting into online fist fights over silly topics. Moderators have the right to lock topics that are heading in the wrong direction.
There is a reason for The Lounge. It's for off-topic discussions that are not deemed fit for anywhere else. To lock a thread because of a potential threat of flaming does not pre-suppose in actuality that there will be any flaming. To go ahead and lock it anyway because of a one-sided interpretation is nothing more than draconian censorship. Maybe it's okay to shoot someone just in case they were going to rob you.
Something tells me this will suffer the same fate (damn I hate crap like that). Online... fist-fights? Also, while the site is primarily for writing, there are specific areas (as such) where members get to know one another and discuss other things. Otherwise, it's not an online community... just some critique-mill... and that would make people less likely to do anything for anyone else.
Uh, MV...you're kind of turning this into a fight right now. This is the reason topics get closed. You need to know when to back off, please.
It's not going to sink in is it? No matter how simply and straight forward I try to explain the importance of waiting patiently to see if any discussion/debate turns into a flame war or not, and then having an actual reason to lock a thread, no one is going to get it. I don't know how much more simple or in what other language I can use to make this much more easy to understand.
Max I can understand where you are coming from and what you are trying to say. But we have to look at these situations from both points of view. Sometimes it is best to prevent flamming from arising than it is to sit back and let it break out within the forum and cause more issues. That is my opinion anyways. Torana
I've seen forums completely self-destruct when a discussion bursts into flame. It may seem preemptive to you, but there's really no benefit in waiting until flashover. When participants start making personal comments about one another's viewpoints. it probably IS time to reign it in. From the inception of the thread, the mods warned that it would be stopped at whatever point the discussion began to get heated. It is a topic that is very likely to get people heated up, so I applaud that a conservative approach was taken.
you have seen what has happened in other threads recently, how sour they have turned. it is too easy for peole to get annoyed and stressed out over debates, especially over religion and politics (my grandad told me ) i do agree that it is better to be safer than sorry in some cases, this being one of them. i had allreadt heard someone telling me that that thread was getting a little too heated tbh, and it is one of those topics where no-one is going to walk away from it until they are forced to. so there was two choices, wait for everyone to get annoyed and start flaming (which would eventually happen, as it does with all debate threads) and the mods would end up warning people and that's make 'em more annoyed and people might end up banned and with grudges against each other etc etc etc. or the other choice was to close the thread now so that everyone has had their say on the matter and it can be left at that. Heather
This isn't primarily a politics or religion forum. Neither was the topic: Start heavily debating about each others religions. It was even a bit off-topic. I was thinking of letting the topic be reopened with some warnings to stop arguing and we will consider this, but only if you, Anthrax and the others lay off a bit, then we might unlock it.
To be honest, I was surprised how long it kept running and I knew it would end up getting locked. I personally would be reluctant to see it unlocked because from what I was starting to see, a certain member was basically pushing his/her vies on others and dismissing others' beliefs. implying that no matter what was said, he/she was right. end of story, (my take and view only btw) which I found irritating. To heavily push your beliefs on anyone when they disagree with you is wrong. I mean no offense in posting this, but this is just my point of view. Besides, if you don't like what's going on in this particular forum, then by all means, start your own forum with your own rules and so forth. The moderators actually have a life ouside the internet (which I hope!) so trying to sort out squabbles between strangers while dealing with other stuff would be an extremely stressful job. And as for waiting to see if any topic becomes a flame-a-thon, the topic was already becoming heated. Why don't you just discuss/debate the topic privatly? Then you could see how much further it gets before you insulting each other. ~DOZ
I have had a read of the religion thread that Kit locked after reading Max's first post in this thread. And I have to say Kit was within her right as a moderator to lock it. It was becoming a flaming ground. If Hulls had seen that he would have instantly locked it. If you have a problem you should PM the Mod you have an issue with if you can't sort out the problem then ask Lpspider. You can't expect the mods to leave a thread be when flaming starts up and arguing ensues. I happen to agree with Kits decision and fully support her actions. It was her call. Now if you feel strongly about the thread simply start up a new thread and clearly state in your first post "Please no flaming." Because we will lock threads with flaming. Hulls Raven wouldn't tolerate it so neither will we? If Whisp re-opens the thread it will be monitored regularly by myself and I will lock it again if I see more than enough Flaming. I also believe in the right to speak freely. But that doesn't mean members can flame with their freedom of speech. This place has rules as does the country we all live in. I suggest you read those rules carefully and in detail if you don't understand anything then ask.
I'll give you a good example of letting things get out of hand when it's too late Roleplay for example. I was on this forum once where people were roleplaying and stuff like French Kissing came up. ( detail of it) Now, while that was mildly inapproirate, it could have become something much worse and since you can't be on 247/ waiting for that thing to really explode, waiting for someone to go over the line which was already being breached, they locked it before that happened, e.g before other things started happening, which would of been very inappriorate for the forum it was in, one which I am sure was visited by yonuger people as well. Point is, the mods were right to do it there and what happened there was a similar scenario to what we have there, doing something before something happened which couldn't be taken back once it happened. As was said Kit was right to lock it, so sorry if you think we were trying to take away your freedom of speech, but we have to keep in mind others as well, simple fact is that you just can't please everybody.. it's a fact of life really.
Yeah, you may see my choice to lock the thread as premature but it had already, in my opinion, surpassed a "friendly debate". It started off as a thread to help somebody find religion, and then moved on to discussing view points towards different religions. This was alright because it was done tactfully and respectfully, but then it moved on again to become attacks on each other personally and that isn't good for anybody. It seemed to turn into a competition about whose religion was right or wrong... and these forums aren't about that.
I'm surprised it went on as long as it did. It was always going to turn into an argument, and it was always going to end up closed.
sorry but hahahaaa, French Kissing, what a funny way to put it i say "lets kiss with tongues" sorry, i am very immature
