|
|
Post by macadamiaman on Feb 11, 2007 22:19:32 GMT -6
Locking a thread gives the last person, or people, the last "say" in a thread.
I've noticed it's also common practice to put a little comment at the end too. A comment that can only be impressed upon the reader, but not reacted to. A form of censorship, sure, but also a way for certain people in power to excersize their power in very blatantly biased way.
Perhaps there is there a better alternative to locking threads? I think a forum where all voices are heard - no matter how gramatically incorrect or disagreeable - is a generally more formidable and friendly environment, than one that rules thought and opinion with an iron fist, a la 1984.
Granted, I am talking more about a place like "Around the Water Cooler" than "Audio/Electric," for instance...
|
|
|
|
Post by algonquin on Feb 12, 2007 0:07:20 GMT -6
There has to be some kind of control. Freedom of speech is not an open ticket when it is is used to insight and insult. The majority of the time that a thread has been locked I was in agreement with the decision to lock it. Many times our freedom to express ourselves goes beyond the point of expression and reaches a level where the writer is attempting more to insight and insult rather than discuss. I know this is a judgement call. There is a point where we are no longer communicating on the subject of the thread and it reaches a level of BS and the discussion has moved beyond its effectiveness. Its time to lock it. I personally do not see this as censorship. As in any meeting where the discussion reaches a point of insighting and insulting others and drifts way off the subject it is the job of the modorator to bring it back under control. Same for this site.
The ACNA Charter of Conduct lays out the expectations of conduct for each club member. Personally I feel the moderators have done a good job exercising judgement to enforce it without going totally off the deep end and unneccessarily throttling people that have stepped over the guidelines.
|
|
|
|
Post by JimW on Feb 12, 2007 11:56:21 GMT -6
Generally the Staff comment is to reinforce the point that the posting member has violated site rules. Usually a lock should give an explanation and a warning, site staff here is pretty humble, but won't tolerate nonsense.
I can count on one hand the number of locks we've had in the last few months due to conduct violations. This is not a severe problem.
I'm very interested in hearing more opinions and thoughts on this matter. However if you all feel that cyber anarchy is the way to go, with no site rules and let everyone exercise their god-given freedom of speech, I will step down as site administrator, delete my membership and walk away from this site. I've been a staff member on 4 automotive sites and 2 currently. Both have rules in place to allow for the enjoyment of all without being exposed questionable material. And both thrive nicely.
A couple locks here and there and Staff exercising their "power" which by the way is earned shouldn't take away from what the site offers.
and
Based on my experience and in my eyes, you are incorrect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aurora40 on Feb 12, 2007 12:10:53 GMT -6
Hey Mac, I sent you this in PM as the thread was locked. I didn't see this thread:
I do agree that admin/moderators should refrain from putting in their two-cents as the last reply. Rather they should simply state the reason the thread is being locked, and lock it.
I think you'd be hard pressed to show how anyone here has ruled your thoughts and opinions, though.
As a general statement, in regards to Freedom of Speech, you have that freedom. You can go out and start your own web forum, you can publish a newsletter, you can do all kinds of things, and no police will show up at your house late at night and kill you.
However you should be aware of another freedom, the freedom of association. This is a club, and most of the members prefer an atmosphere without swearing, flaming, and other kinds of behaviors. You can either follow those guidelines, you can ask to have them changed (this has happened many times, and there's always a solid body of people who prefer a 'clean' forum), or you can hit the road.
|
|
scottydl
Super Moderator 
There's nothin' like an American V-8...
Posts: 7,373
Staff Member
|
Post by scottydl on Feb 12, 2007 17:24:44 GMT -6
As mentioned already, locking threads (for the purpose of ending a conversation) is certainly NOT a "common practice" here. I'd venture to say less than 1% end up that way. This board is indeed a great place to be, because of (1) the awesome members that stick around here and post regularly, and (2) the enforcement of club rules that are always in place. Occasionally members come along who don't like the rules and cause a little rift, but it rarely lasts long or has much of an impact. The core members of ACNA recognize these things and don't get shaken up too easliy.  Re: the ever-quoted First Amendment... the right to free speech does not exist here! ACNA is not a democracy. Members must abide by the rules to keep their right to participate. And let me thank the 99.9% of registered members here who do just that.  |
|
|
|
Post by macadamiaman on Feb 12, 2007 18:17:24 GMT -6
I never quoted the first amendment, it's silly to apply that to a private online forum. All in all, my only suggestion/question was that I'm just thinking that there must be a better alternative to ending a conversation that disagrees with the preferences of a moderator. But I guess nobody really came up with anything, and I have no ideas that anyone would agree with... oh well. Also, for clarification, "common practice" refers not to its frequency in general, but rather its commonality when dealing with threads that contradict the preferences of a moderator. Perhaps deleting threads of this sort would be better. It's just very annoying to read through a thread, have a lot of thoughts here and there, and then find out in the end I cannot express them in the thread. |
|
scottydl
Super Moderator
There's nothin' like an American V-8...
Posts: 7,373
Staff Member
|
Post by scottydl on Feb 12, 2007 21:39:52 GMT -6
Deleting threads seems to cause a bigger problem, because it eliminates all evidence of what existed to be deleted in the first place. With locking & commenting, current and future members can at least have a record of what is and is not allowed and will have a record of why a lock occurred. Additionally, threads often end up locked because of a few inappropriate comments, but that doesn't mean the entire conversation is useless and should be removed. Managing the delete-or-don't-delete choice would be difficult in these cases, and IMO would depend on a moderator's personal discretion just like the issue of locking. I never quoted the first amendment, it's silly to apply that to a private online forum. Agreed, and my bad if that seemed directed at you. That was more of a global statement of mine, since the 1st always seems to be brought up when it comes to restricting a member's opinion in some way. |
|
|
|
Post by slimpee on Feb 23, 2007 16:16:40 GMT -6
I have been told several times to censor myself in terms of language used. To be honest I don't have a huge problem with that. This is the only forum i'm on that has strict guidelines about language use so i often forget. Sorry mods.
In terms of locking up threads I disagree with the practice. Instead, I would re-name questionable threads and give it a label to let others know that it contains questionable subject matter. In general I feel that web forums do a decent job of policing themselves as evidenced by either highly-trafficked, albeit controversial threads, or ridiculous threads that are left to die. I feel that if a thread is to be locked here it should be because it contains language which the author has been repeatedly warned to change but hasn't.
What i'm trying to say is that I agree with censoring based on gratuitous swear words but NOT on subject matter.
My .02
|
|
|
|
Post by Letitroll98 on Feb 23, 2007 18:37:14 GMT -6
I don't know which thread started the discussion here as I've absent a bit, but I actually agree with everyone here. An admin or mod certainly has the right to be involved in discussions of their choosing. And I think the staff here has been very even handed for the most part, but if it came about that a staff member got in a dust up that needed moderating, certainly they should call in a neutral third party to render any decisions. Any "last punches" delivered by a staff member should be deleted by a senior staff member. That being said I haven't noticed a problem that was all that serious.
The standard here has been PG rated since the beginning and I see no reason to change. I don't agree with every locked thread or banned membership, but one has to have a sense of the greater good and the preferences of the many over the one.
Please don't leave Jim! (You're our only hope Obe Wan) Since the demise of our late founder (I know she's not dead, but it's more romantic to think of her as passing away rather than abandoning us) you've been the steady hand that has guided the club to ever greater growth. If your next 100 decisions were totally lame (not that you've made any lame decisions, it's like...sort of an example, hypothetically speaking) , it wouldn't make a pimple on the good you've done here. Maybe I should stop now.....
|
|
scottydl
Super Moderator
There's nothin' like an American V-8...
Posts: 7,373
Staff Member
|
Post by scottydl on Feb 24, 2007 9:41:27 GMT -6
If your next 100 decisions were totally lame (not that you've made any lame decisions, it's like...sort of an example, hypothetically speaking) , it wouldn't make a pimple on the good you've done here. Maybe I should stop now..... LOL, hey Jim that sounds like permission to make 100 lame decisions! Go for it buddy! ;D |
|
