Yay, we've been saved from ourselves again!

[PlainJain]

Link.

Miller (who I believe is a good mod) closed the Walmarticus thread even though posters were having a good time. I know this has been done before but this is tiresome. If you really need to be anal about it, move it MPSIMP and let posters continue to have fun - the thing we come here to do, remember.

But I suppose Twix would save us from ourselves there. Sigh.

[Zeldar]

That may have been my fault. I make it a habit of not visiting The Pit. I have posted in 49 threads since I got here that are now in The Pit and a good number of them have been closed for whatever reason.

But since this one looked tame and silly enough I thought I'd break my own rule and see what would happen. I guess I know!

Sorry, y'all!

[billfish678]

Originally Posted by PlainJain

If you really need to be anal about it, move it MPSIMP and let posters continue to have fun - the thing we come here to do, remember.

But I suppose Twix would save us from ourselves there. Sigh.

Yep, because a silly thread there was closed down a few days ago.

[Little Nemo]

We've all seen it. A bad mood leads to bad modding.

[Czarcasm]

Are you actually protesting the closing of a thread where the OP says "Nevermind" after giving us nothing but the title? Low standards I can understand, but no standards whatsoever...?

[Inner Stickler]

Closing a thread because it's "too pointless" or "too silly" or "too stupid" means only one thing: the moderators clearly don't have enough to do. Sometimes the point is to not have a point.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Inner Stickler

Closing a thread because it's "too pointless" or "too silly" or "too stupid" means only one thing: the moderators clearly don't have enough to do. Sometimes the point is to not have a point.

Much like this thread, I suppose.

[Zeldar]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

Much like this thread, I suppose.

Or maybe like this one.

[PlainJain]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

Are you actually protesting the closing of a thread where the OP says "Nevermind" after giving us nothing but the title? Low standards I can understand, but no standards whatsoever...?

Protest is a strong word for my OP. I just don't understand those types of closings. This is a message board. People come here for entertainment. What possible harm is there in leaving a thread open where posters are clearly having fun and there is no harm being done? My objection is not this thread in particular but these types of closings in general. Let us have our fun, consarnit!

As a matter of fact, it's always asked in these situations but never answered directly so let me ask it officially:

Mods, how can a thread be "too pointless" if people are participating in it and enjoying themselves? Why not let it sink on it's own accord? What do threads like this hurt by being allowed to remain open? Thank You.

[PlainJain]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

Much like this thread, I suppose.

Not at all. Just because you don't like doesn't mean it doesn't have a point. I'm a member of this community - same as you - and as such, am free to express my opinion of the running of this board in the appropriate forum.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Zeldar

Or maybe like this one.

No. Once again I point out that the OP of the thread in question said nothing more than "Nevermind"-as in "Disregard", "I made a mistake in starting this", "I changed my mind" etc.

[Czarcasm]

Post #4 from the MPSIMS rules sticky.

[Inner Stickler]

And if the thread in question were a postcount padding party, that rule would be relevant. (If still dumb, but it's a dope rule so that's not new.)

[living_in_hell]

I like that thread! I know that this place is pretty much a nerd herd (I say that lovingly and include myself) but there was something about that thread that had a "last day of school before Xmas break" feel...like it was fun and funNY. Even smart kids need to losen up once in a while...and there, the humor was still smart.

Having had my first 2 threads closed plus numerous personal attacks (no not playing victim) as well as threats to be banned, I found it quite refreshing. Better than name calling or nitpicking a typo or a smily, in my opinion.

(please don't ban me for posting this!)

[PlainJain]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

Post #4 from the MPSIMS rules sticky.

Blah, blah, blah. Same ol', same ol'. I'm quite aware aware of that post. The thread in the OP doesn't apply to either but that didn't answer my question anyway. It's just the same dodge that's always given.

Let me help you see the relevant question

"What do threads like this hurt by being allowed to remain open?"

Wanna take a swing at a real answer?

[Trepa Mayfield]

I'm not a mod, but I would guess that the danger is in a number of useless/pointless threads being created/bumped/posted in at the same time, and pushing actual content off of the front page of the forum thread list. One might not be annoying (to you). Ten probably are.

[Czarcasm]

The OP removed any content or meaning of the thread when he posted nothing more than "Nevermind". Threads with no content or meaning get closed. That what it says in the rules you agreed to.

[PlainJain]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

The OP removed any content or meaning of the thread when he posted nothing more than "Nevermind". Threads with no content or meaning get closed. That what it says in the rules you agreed to.

Yeah, I didn't think so.


.

[Inner Stickler]

Originally Posted by Trepa Mayfield

I'm not a mod, but I would guess that the danger is in a number of useless/pointless threads being created/bumped/posted in at the same time, and pushing actual content off of the front page of the forum thread list. One might not be annoying (to you). Ten probably are.

If there's enough of a community to make 10 viable goofy threads all at the top of the forum page then they're the actual content.

Czarcasm, if posting never mind stripped all the meaning from the thread, it would have had 0 replies and disappeared into the bowels of the forum. Since it didn't, clearly it meant something to someone.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by PlainJain

Yeah, I didn't think so.

This is a moderated board, but apparently you don't like that fact. I happen to think that getting a sense of what a thread is about by looking at the title is pretty damn handy, but you seem to think that turning the whole MPSIMS into some sort of unmoderated free-association game would be fine and dandy. To each his(or her) own, but I think that such a forum would look like shit.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Inner Stickler

If there's enough of a community to make 10 viable goofy threads all at the top of the forum page then they're the actual content.

Czarcasm, if posting never mind stripped all the meaning from the thread, it would have had 0 replies and disappeared into the bowels of the forum. Since it didn't, clearly it meant something to someone.

Clearly it meant something different to each poster, which means that the title of the thread didn't make it clear what the thread was about which is, once again, against the rules.

[Inner Stickler]

Moderation is useful for eliminating spammers and handling poster disputes. Moderation is not useful when it attempts to change the tenor of the board. There's no reason to assume that allowing the walmarticus thread to remain open would have turned MPSIMS into any more of a free-association game than it already is and if it did, then it's because the community in aggregate wanted it to be that way.

[Czarcasm]

Here's a little test: Who here(besides the OP) can tell me what jali had in mind when he posted that thread?

[Inner Stickler]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

Clearly it meant something different to each poster, which means that the title of the thread didn't make it clear what the thread was about which is, once again, against the rules.

What's wrong with something meaning different things to different people? It's clear enough that she had something to say about the poster Walmarticus although, what that was, I couldn't tell you. What you have failed to do, however, is explain in a satisfactory manner why one must rely on the title to provide necessary context instead of the OP and why when it's clear that posters are ok with that lack of context, the moderators feel it necessary to close the thread anyway.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Inner Stickler

What's wrong with something meaning different things to different people? It's clear enough that she had something to say about the poster Walmarticus although, what that was, I couldn't tell you. What you have failed to do, however, is explain in a satisfactory manner why one must rely on the title to provide necessary context instead of the OP and why when it's clear that posters are ok with that lack of context, the moderators feel it necessary to close the thread anyway.

I'm not going to explain to you why the thread's title should have something to do with the thread, because it is self frakkin' evident.

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

Here's a little test: Who here(besides the OP) can tell me what jali had in mind when he posted that thread?

Is that the only standard? The OP is only one post in the thread, which you closed in its entirety. A bad OP might be part of a good thread.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

Is that the only standard? The OP is only one post in the thread, which you closed in its entirety. A bad OP might be part of a good thread.

1. I didn't close anything.
2. The OP wasn't good or bad-it wasn't there!. It seems that jali was going to post something, then changed his mind, posted "nevermind" instead, and walked away from it.

[PlainJain]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

This is a moderated board, but apparently you don't like that fact. I happen to think that getting a sense of what a thread is about by looking at the title is pretty damn handy, but you seem to think that turning the whole MPSIMS into some sort of unmoderated free-association game would be fine and dandy. To each his(or her) own, but I think that such a forum would look like shit.

Over-react much? Apparently the only way you can feel good about your position is by putting words in my mouth.

*I like this board.
*I like that it's moderated.
*I like the moderator of the thread mentioned in the OP.
*Sometimes threads take on a life of their own regardless of the OP.
*Your own OP mentioned in post 8 failed to meet the rules you quoted in post 12, yet amazingly it didn't bring the board to it's knees. No one used it to post-pad, it just sank away and all remained right with the world.

You can continue to rail "but it's a RULE!!! all you want but it doesn't answer the question of why. There used to be a 'rule' about instantly closing zombie threads. People voiced objections and the 'rule' was relaxed. That's how things can work, that's what this forum is for. Surely you can understand that... right?

[Inner Stickler]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

I'm not going to explain to you why the thread's title should have something to do with the thread, because it is self frakkin' evident.

Then someone should have changed the title to match the OP.

The reason Nemo thought you closed it is because you were a mod within recent memory, you're acting as if you're the mod who closed it, and if my memory isn't faulty, it's exactly the sort of thing you'd close a thread for.

Jali is a girl.

[Morgenstern]

What the hell, if a thread is active, good topic or not, why not let it breath? It's not like it's sucking the life out of a kitten somewhere.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Inner Stickler

Then someone should have changed the title to match the OP.

The OP of the thread was "Nevermind", as in "Disregard this thread, it was a mistake". What the hell would you change the title to to make it match the OP?

[billfish678]

Originally Posted by Morgenstern

What the hell, if a thread is active, good topic or not, why not let it breath? It's not like it's sucking the life out of a kitten somewhere.

You really don't understand how the internet works do you?

[Joey P]

Not that it really changes the discussion much, but just to keep our pronouns straight, Jali's a she.

[Scumpup]

Czarcasm isn't a moderator, so don't waste lifespan arguing over this with him further. He has no authority to lock or unlock threads, nor do his interpretations of rules carry any particular weight.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Scumpup

Czarcasm isn't a moderator, so don't waste lifespan arguing over this with him further. He has no authority to lock or unlock threads, nor do his interpretations of rules carry any particular weight.

Equal weight with everyone else posting here, including you. Right?

[PlainJain]

Originally Posted by billfish678

You really don't understand how the internet works do you?

OK, that was funny.

[Scumpup]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

Equal weight with everyone else posting here, including you. Right?

Yeah, but I'm not the guy running his mouth like he speaks ex cathedra on board matters in this thread. You are.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Scumpup

Yeah, but I'm not the guy running his mouth like he speaks ex cathedra on board matters in this thread. You are.

If you think my opinion is wrong, tell me why you think so.
If you think I'm junior modding, report me.

[Measure for Measure]

I vote for closing pointless threads.

[Ellen Cherry]

Just my modly 0.02 here, since I'm not a Pit mod and didn't close the thing — I would have closed such a thread in IMHO, but left it open in MPSIMS. Probably Marley would tell you the same thing. If people are having fun in MPSIMS, even though it was basically content-free, there's not a big problem there, to me, if people are being clever and having fun with it. But the other forums, eh, it's a bit of a problem. They're set up to discuss stuff, debate stuff, have questions answered, and blow off steam. If there's content-free threads allowed there, then we aren't really upholding the standards we set out to have.

Make sense?

[PlainJain]

Originally Posted by Measure for Measure

I vote for closing pointless threads.

A contender! I'm not advocating opening the thread in question, that would be silly but I would be interested in your opinion of what is the harm in leaving them open in general.

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

If you think my opinion is wrong, tell me why you think so.

You haven't given an opinion of what harm they cause, you just keep saying it's against the rules.

[PlainJain]

Originally Posted by Ellen Cherry

Just my modly 0.02 here, since I'm not a Pit mod and didn't close the thing — I would have closed such a thread in IMHO, but left it open in MPSIMS. Probably Marley would tell you the same thing. If people are having fun in MPSIMS, even though it was basically content-free, there's not a big problem there, to me, if people are being clever and having fun with it. But the other forums, eh, it's a bit of a problem. They're set up to discuss stuff, debate stuff, have questions answered, and blow off steam. If there's content-free threads allowed there, then we aren't really upholding the standards we set out to have.

Make sense?

Yep, thanks Ellen. I did suggest in the OP that if people were having fun and participating it could be moved to MPSIMS.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by PlainJain

A contender! I'm not advocating opening the thread in question, that would be silly but I would be interested in your opinion of what is the harm in leaving them open in general.


You haven't given an opinion of what harm they cause, you just keep saying it's against the rules.

Something doesn't have to "cause harm" to be against the rules. If The Powers That Be want this place to resemble a message board where people have (sometimes) intelligent conversation, instead of a playpen, then it is their right to design the rules thusly. Personally, I see nothing attractive about "Post whatever you want, because we just don't give a shit" type directionless boards.

[Czarcasm]

Posting about cookie recipes in Great Debates "does no harm".
Posting about WWII in About This Message Board "does no harm".
Posting about your pet's illness in COCC/SR "does no harm".

[Inner Stickler]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

The OP of the thread was "Nevermind", as in "Disregard this thread, it was a mistake". What the hell would you change the title to to make it match the OP?

Dunno. I'm not the one with the thread titles must match OPs rule.

No one is arguing that the thread should have been left alone. We're saying, when you have a choice between moving it to the quote unquote silly forum or closing it, why not do the option that still leaves people the chance to play in it?

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

Posting about cookie recipes in Great Debates "does no harm".
Posting about WWII in About This Message Board "does no harm".
Posting about your pet's illness in COCC/SR "does no harm".

Posting about mundane pointless things in MPSIMS does no harm? Because isn't that where your analogy breaks down?

And I realize the Walmarticus thread wasn't posted in MPSIMS. But threads in MPSIMS have been closed down for having no point - in a forum that's supposedly intended for pointless threads.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

Posting about mundane pointless things in MPSIMS does no harm? Because isn't that where your analogy breaks down?

And I realize the Walmarticus thread wasn't posted in MPSIMS. But threads in MPSIMS have been closed down for having no point - in a forum that's supposedly intended for pointless threads.

Perhaps the word "Pointless" should be removed from the forum title?

[billfish678]

nevermind

[PlainJain]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

Perhaps the word "Pointless" should be removed from the forum title?

Or the rule relaxed a bit.

[John Mace]

What a stupid idea to keep a contentless OP thread open. Why not just have a bot to open threads every second with no content.

Good moderation by Miller.