Closed topics.

[Joules]

Oh Well! Someone had to ask.

[Nick Nation]

I'm going for 'no' - one of the reasons being that it would spoil things for the rest of us who can disagree with each other without getting too beastly. 

[Jules]

Fair comment, but as I'd re-opened them both some few minutes earlier, perhaps a little redundant.

I do have the right though, it's just that mostly I choose not to exercise it 

As a reminder, this is not an open forum it is an unmoderated forum. Non-members are not allowed to post. When becoming a member you sign-up to certain standards of behaviour which I expect you to maintain. These in essence are that you can hold and express any views you wish to, provided that you don't do so in a way that is "false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, adult material, or otherwise in violation of any International or United States Federal law." (The US law bit is because our servers were previously US based).

[Akeno-Pool]

If we vote 'No' does that mean this thread will have to be closed?

[Greasy Trucker]

Yes, there HAS  to be some degree of moderation. I troll other forums, the well moderated ones are pretty much like this, the badly moderated ones are anarchy. 

[Nick Nation]

Cripes, the Closed Topic thread has become so closed that I can't see the poll anymore (unless I'm logged on)...yet I can see the 'Current Manband' poll whether I'm logged on or not...

[Jules]

Cripes, the Closed Topic thread has become so closed that I can't see the poll anymore (unless I'm logged on)...yet I can see the 'Current Manband' poll whether I'm logged on or not...

I'll check that out. There were a few unexplained glitches on permissions yesterday that might be affecting this too.......

[Nick Nation]

I'll check that out. There were a few unexplained glitches on permissions yesterday that might be affecting this too.

Thanks Jules - this is a particularly important topic and I'm sure the punters would want to see the scores on the doors. Looking back, I notice that Rob had the same issue with the 'Current Manband' thread.

[Jules]

It's because the poll creator opted not to share the results with everyone (i.e. Guests). Joules should be able to edit the poll settings to allow this. I'll happily do that if Joules agrees.

The "Current Manband" poll is set to allow anyone to see it, so Mr Pritchard probably modified it already.

[Nick Nation]

Fair comment, but as I'd re-opened them both some few minutes earlier, perhaps a little redundant.

Drat.

Ok then...

When becoming a member you sign-up to certain standards of behaviour which I expect you to maintain.

Fair enough....so if someone isn't maintaining these standards, that would suggest action should be taken with that person rather than the entire topic as a whole.

Does that count as a double 'no'?

[Allan Heron]

Fair enough....so if someone isn't maintaining these standards, that would suggest action should be taken with that person rather than the entire topic as a whole.

Does that count as a double 'no'?

I'd suggest both might well be appropriate dependant on circumstances. 

I always regard my presence on any message board as being the equivalent of being invited into the home of the owner of said board.   They set the rules, and if I don't like them then I leave.   If I want to use the board, then I abide by whatever rules might be in place. 

I'd wholly endorse Greasy Truckers comments regarding message boards.   This one has benefitted from only the lightest touch of moderation over the years which is as much a reflection on the good sense of its' contributors.  Let's keep it that way in which case the whole issue of what the moderators may or may not do in differing circumstances becomes a non-issue

[Rob W]

For what it's worth, I was expecting and hoping the threads would have been locked long before they were. I think it's common to see within message boards/forums, threads being locked.

I'd have thought locking threads would be more beneficial than action against the person, because
1)action against one person won't stop others posting inappropriate material
2)moderators end up being overworked vetting all posts
3)said poster only reappears under a different username

Only if an individual persistently offends, then action has to be taken against that person subject to 3).

I do talk some rubbish don't I ?

 

[Jules]

Regarding my brief locking of two threads yesterday, the intention was indeed to try and re-establish some calm. A wise head contacted me privately and pointed out how this might be mis-represented by those with axes to grind and, on reflection, I had to agree. Locking a topic is something of a fool's errand in any case, as anyone can open new topics to continue the argument whenever they want to. So, mea culpa.

As far as people's behaviour is concerned, if in my opinion someone steps over the invisible lines then I contact them privately and ask them to rein it in a bit. I'm glad to say that I've only been pushed down that route on a very small number of occasions, as the vast majority of people here do respect the etiquette even where they (we) might disagree with each other.

Peer pressure is the most effective tool for moderation in my view.

[Nick Nation]

A well balanced decision. Approved - despite what the poll says!! Having said that, I can fully understand why the locked topic route was initially taken.

There's only about 30 regular posters (and some of them are in Fleetwood Mac) so we all promise that we won't all be beastly all at the same time. I suggest a rota system. When's the next Man gig in the UK?

[Rob W]

I bet I know who that "wise head" is.

A trowel, bag of cement, and a piggin' massive wall springs to mind.