Locked threads

[jks9199]

I have always wondered if there is a hierarchy/org chart to MatrialTalk and the moderators. Does such information exist within the MT section of Forum Foundry?

It used to... I'd have to look around to see if it survived moves.

Broadly speaking:

• Member. That's everybody. Even mods and admins. Hang out, participate, and have fun.
• Mentor. A member who is a better than average example, or who has special knowledge. We look for Mentors to help calm threads, explain how things work, and generally just be a positive influence around the site.
• Moderator. The first line of defense for the site . Mods generally help handle the function of the site, and help enforce the rules.
• Sr. Moderator. Generally, a more experienced mod with additional authorities and powers on the back end.
• Asst. Administrator. Even more experience and powers... but still the same pay.
• Administrator. You guessed it... more back end authority. More experience and institutional memory about how we've dealt with issues in the past.

Generally, we try to run a model of "least moderation is best moderation" which is why you often see "friendly reminders" tp everyone before more formal warnings in a thread. Beyond that, we deal with the member directly, either warnings or point infractions. Too many points, and you get a temporary ban. We don't discuss actions against individual members with anyone but that member. So, if you report TrollofTheWeek -- we won't tell you what happened to them. And we reserve the right to skip directly to more serious sanctions when appropriate.

 

[lklawson]

And Martial Artists having different opinions on Martial Arts? Nah.

I had a friend who once opined about a martial arts forum:
"A herd of Martial Artists get together and a fight breaks out? Qeulle Suprise." -Chas Clements

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Graywalker]

Sorry for the late response, I forgot my password and it was locked lol...the irony.

I am speaking more along the lines of threads being locked, due to people straying off topic. It seems to happen often on really good threads.

 

[Steve]

Sorry for the late response, I forgot my password and it was locked lol...the irony.

I am speaking more along the lines of threads being locked, due to people straying off topic. It seems to happen often on really good threads.

Some thread drift is unavoidable, for a few major reasons. First, folks can read the same thing and spin off in two completely different direction. Whether this is misunderstanding, or just a function of their experiences and interests. Second, at some point every thread runs out of steam... you have maybe 20 people who post regularly around here. So, after they've all weighed in, the thread will either languish or move in a different direction.

Take this thread as a case in point. After some folks weighed in it calmed down. The other option is, it could take a twist and spin off in an unexpected direction.

 

[Graywalker]

Some thread drift is unavoidable, for a few major reasons. First, folks can read the same thing and spin off in two completely different direction. Whether this is misunderstanding, or just a function of their experiences and interests. Second, at some point every thread runs out of steam... you have maybe 20 people who post regularly around here. So, after they've all weighed in, the thread will either languish or move in a different direction.

Take this thread as a case in point. After some folks weighed in it calmed down. The other option is, it could take a twist and spin off in an unexpected direction.

It is funny you mentioned the tone of the thread, I noticed that as well and noted that, it mellowed out.

It is unfortunate that some really good threads get locked, due to a few people going off topic, but after the explanations...I will leave it to the mods.

 

[Steve]

It is funny you mentioned the tone of the thread, I noticed that as well and noted that, it mellowed out.

It is unfortunate that some really good threads get locked, due to a few people going off topic, but after the explanations...I will leave it to the mods.

This is a perfect example. I am sincerely surprised that you think I was talking at all about tone. I was talking about just the natural ebb and flow of a forum discussion. When I say "run out of steam" or "calmed down" i'm not talking about tone, but about activity.

 

[Graywalker]

This is a perfect example. I am sincerely surprised that you think I was talking at all about tone. I was talking about just the natural ebb and flow of a forum discussion. When I say "run out of steam" or "calmed down" i'm not talking about tone, but about activity.

We all see different things, I see these types of discussions that go off track, as a negative aspect to the original topic.

Again, I am speaking about the flow, going away from the original topic and on to a subject hardly related to an OP's post.

And the tone changing from a positive discussion to a negative one.

 

[Buka]

I believe it all comes from reading print. If we were all together in person actually discussing and/or working out together, we'd be having a ball.

And @simon could make us coffee afterwards!

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

It is funny you mentioned the tone of the thread, I noticed that as well and noted that, it mellowed out.

It is unfortunate that some really good threads get locked, due to a few people going off topic, but after the explanations...I will leave it to the mods.

In general, we actually don't care about thread drift all that much. Not so much because we approve or disapprove (I'm sure each mod/admin has their own opinion on that), but because we'd have to go around locking each thread if we did, and it would start arguments about how much thread drift is acceptable.

If there's a really bad case of it, the most that we'll do is start a new thread and move the related posts to that thread. Even that doesn't happen too often.

When a thread gets locked, it's normally either because the thread has drifted to politics specifically, or because everyone is getting heated and making too many personal attacks-my belief (and I'm pretty sure the other mods as well), is that we'd rather lock a thread and give everyone a few points (short explanation: points build up and last x time and if they get added enough you get a temp ban), rather than let it go on and end up giving a lot of points or banning active members because they continued fighting. Especially since in those situations a lot of times both sides are getting points, regardless of who started it.

 

[Graywalker]

In general, we actually don't care about thread drift all that much. Not so much because we approve or disapprove (I'm sure each mod/admin has their own opinion on that), but because we'd have to go around locking each thread if we did, and it would start arguments about how much thread drift is acceptable.

If there's a really bad case of it, the most that we'll do is start a new thread and move the related posts to that thread. Even that doesn't happen too often.

When a thread gets locked, it's normally either because the thread has drifted to politics specifically, or because everyone is getting heated and making too many personal attacks-my belief (and I'm pretty sure the other mods as well), is that we'd rather lock a thread and give everyone a few points (short explanation: points build up and last x time and if they get added enough you get a temp ban), rather than let it go on and end up giving a lot of points or banning active members because they continued fighting. Especially since in those situations a lot of times both sides are getting points, regardless of who started it.

That is the mods perogative, and such discussions, can be easily avoided by those who are not interested. It is unfortunate, that some really good topics get locked, due to a few ranting off topic.
It would be better, to just lock the member going of topic, out of the thread temporarily in my opinion. But, maybe individual lockout, is not feasible.

 

[Steve]

That is the mods perogative, and such discussions, can be easily avoided by those who are not interested. It is unfortunate, that some really good topics get locked, due to a few ranting off topic.
It would be better, to just lock the member going of topic, out of the thread temporarily in my opinion. But, maybe individual lockout, is not feasible.

Not sure whether it's technically possible, but I'm not sure it's practical to consider. Are you envisioning the moderators would individually adjudicate which posts are deemed "on topic" and which are not? What if there's a post with on topic content that also has some off topic content? Would the mods edit the posts?

Why not just start the new thread? There's nothing keeping you from starting new threads to continue good discussions that are appropriate. You may not be able to stop that thread from also going astray, but you never know. Sometimes, second, third, fourth, or maybe fifth time's the charm. Where I've seen these be most successful is when a thread is started that clearly gets into a specific element of the previous, unsuccessful thread.

 

[Graywalker]

Not sure whether it's technically possible, but I'm not sure it's practical to consider. Are you envisioning the moderators would individually adjudicate which posts are deemed "on topic" and which are not? What if there's a post with on topic content that also has some off topic content? Would the mods edit the posts?

Why not just start the new thread? There's nothing keeping you from starting new threads to continue good discussions that are appropriate. You may not be able to stop that thread from also going astray, but you never know. Sometimes, second, third, fourth, or maybe fifth time's the charm. Where I've seen these be most successful is when a thread is started that clearly gets into a specific element of the previous, unsuccessful thread.

It would seem, to me that Mods already individually adjudicate, which post are deemed off topic, and hand out warnings to said individuals.

Yes, it is possible that after many attempts just about anything can be the charm.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

That is the mods perogative, and such discussions, can be easily avoided by those who are not interested. It is unfortunate, that some really good topics get locked, due to a few ranting off topic.
It would be better, to just lock the member going of topic, out of the thread temporarily in my opinion. But, maybe individual lockout, is not feasible.

So again, off topic isn't something we worry about. People aren't getting warnings for posts being off topic. They're getting warnings primarily if they're being insulting or baiting someone else into being insulting, or if they're getting into politics (and with politics we'll generally make a post in thread first stating that, since not everyone has the same view of what's politics). There are some other stuff but those are the main two. We do determine who needs warnings individually, but even then unless they are banned from the site, we don't prevent them from engaging at all, they just do so knowing they'll likely get another warning (which does happen).

We also as far as I know do not have the technical ability to lock a person out of a thread temporarily. The only thing we could do is ban someone from the site temporarily, but I don't think being off topic is something worth getting a ban over, since as I said it's not something we get too concerned about as thread drift is expected in a forum.

 

[Graywalker]

So again, off topic isn't something we worry about. People aren't getting warnings for posts being off topic. They're getting warnings primarily if they're being insulting or baiting someone else into being insulting, or if they're getting into politics (and with politics we'll generally make a post in thread first stating that, since not everyone has the same view of what's politics). There are some other stuff but those are the main two. We do determine who needs warnings individually, but even then unless they are banned from the site, we don't prevent them from engaging at all, they just do so knowing they'll likely get another warning (which does happen).

We also as far as I know do not have the technical ability to lock a person out of a thread temporarily. The only thing we could do is ban someone from the site temporarily, but I don't think being off topic is something worth getting a ban over, since as I said it's not something we get too concerned about as thread drift is expected in a forum.[/QUOTE

Ok

 

[dvcochran]

baiting someone else into being insulting

The mods could do a much better job on this one. Granted, there is some personal flavor that is hard to factor out.

Graywalker, may I ask; it is a forum, why does it really matter?

 

[Bruce7]

I am curious as to how people feel, about threads being locked, due to arguments being started by the same 5 or 6 members.

IMO they generally they do a good job. I wish they would give more warnings before locking a thread.
I had a thread that was locked, I don't disagree with them locking the thread, in fact I was surprised it lasted as long as it did, I just wish they would have given a warning before locking the thread, I thought was a good thread and did not wish it to end.
It would also be nice if the writer of the thread was emailed a reason for the thread to be stopped.

On a different subjuct, I wish people would have to give a reason for a disagree.
If you disagree that is fine, but I need to know what is wrong with the post.

 

[_Simon_]

I believe it all comes from reading print. If we were all together in person actually discussing and/or working out together, we'd be having a ball.

And @simon could make us coffee afterwards!

Done diddly-un!!!

 

[Steve]

If you disagree that is fine, but I need to know what is wrong with the post.

You're not the first person who has said some variation of this, that it's rude to not post an explanation of why you disagree or that people should just be required to do so. But I've never heard anyone say folks have to explain why they agree, too. Or why that "like" a post. @Graywalker , for example, "agreed" with your post. I notice, however, that he didn't post an explanation. Do you think he should be required to do so?

 

[Bruce7]

You're not the first person who has said some variation of this, that it's rude to not post an explanation of why you disagree or that people should just be required to do so. But I've never heard anyone say folks have to explain why they agree, too. Or why that "like" a post. @Graywalker , for example, "agreed" with your post. I notice, however, that he didn't post an explanation. Do you think he should be required to do so?

If you like or dislike that is how you feel and does not need an explaination.
If you agree that means you think the post has merit, so an explanation may not be needed.
If you disagree you are saying the post is wrong and has no merit, so it would be nice to let a person know what is wrong with his post.

I have made mistakes and got a disagree.
After rereading my post,
I did not need an explaination because, It was rude of me to say a glock was a piece of junk.

But there are times I can not figure out why some one disagreed.
I think if you disagee, you should email the person why so things do not get escalated on the thread.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If you like or dislike that is how you feel and does not need an explaination.
If you agree that means you think the post has merit, so an explanation may not be needed.
If you disagree you are saying the post is wrong and has no merit, so it would be nice to let a person know what is wrong with his post.

I have made mistakes and got a disagree.
After rereading my post,
I did not need an explaination because, It was rude of me to say a glock was a piece of junk.

But there are times I can not figure out why some one disagreed.
I think if you disagee, you should email the person why so things do not get escalated on the thread.

Some posts, it seems pretty clear what the disagreement would be. I’m certainly not going to start a DM over every post I disagree with. That seems rather counter to the concept of a forum.