Hmm. Board culture votes against shutting down FXMastermind’s ongoing railing against the phrase “Global Warming”. Without that phrase, I don’t think he’d have much of a thread. Anyway, I withdraw my objection.
And the motto of the site should be changed to “Encouraging Ignorance Since …”
Can we get that too?
Seconded. Never happen though, some stuff is TOO mundane regardless of how much fun we are having.
Without even having read the thread in question, or even any subset of it, I am inclined to agree with this. I have seen other questionable threads closed, even though there was some active discussion and engagement by several others, and I always wondered: WTF? Why close a thread while there are still people on this board who are engaged in the thread?
Because there are some moderators who believe that their fingers will fall off if they don’t push the “close thread” button every X days.
Sorry but I don’t follow the connection you’re making, because you cannot possibly be arguing that threads are closed to stop the flow of ignorance?
Not to mention the fact that the best way to promote ignorance is to shut down open conversation.
I’ve never made much stink about it because it seemed hopeless but this issue has always bugged the fuck out of me and I simply have never been able to wrap my mind around it. I think threads should only be closed for very specific, clear, meaningful reasons, and I confess I’m a bit stumped as to what even those might be.
If a thread wanders off topic, that means that people are engaging each other in a discussion they find rewarding…voluntarily… Who is being harmed by allowing that conversation to continue? If a thread seems to have gone in the direction that means it’s in the inappropriate forum, well so what, but even if that is the case why close it instead of moving it to the correct forum?
I just pulled up a bunch of different closed threads and read the mods explanations, and I just don’t see it. Everybody can choose what threads they want to participate in, so if some threads are not exactly within the rules but everybody’s happy and enjoying their interaction that they are choosing to participate in who is benefitting from these closures? How does closing protect the integrity of the rules better than a direct action on people breaking rules like jerkbeing? With very few exceptions the The closures come off like parents getting sick of listening to their kids yell so they make them leave the room… But the kids themselves are having fun and the only thing really being accomplished is the parents, who have to listen because they are responsible, have relieved themselves of having to listen.
So I guess that’s really what 99% of the closures really are, and are dressed up as other things: moderators are bored with moderating the thread it’s requiring too much of them so they get it out of their way by closing it. Because the fact is the moderators of the only ones who directly benefit and in any conceivable way from the closing of a thread.
It would be delightfully refreshing if a the policy were instituted that was just honest about that: Hey, if you threads become too littered, contentious or fragmented it becomes a pain in our ass to keep staying on top of it and we will close it to simplify our lives. Have fun, everybody!
It’s not a conversation, it’s a monologue. Most people who were arguing with him have given it up and most who engage him are just baiting him. If I started a thread in any other forum and came back to essentially repost my OP five or six times a day, I’d expect it to be shut down post-haste.
Not to mention that no one is actively engaged in the thread in question. It dies for days, then is bumped by the OP with more drivel, at which time various posters respond to said drivel. It dies, gets bumped by the OP days later, rinse and repeat.
So don’t go to the thread. It’s that easy.
Clearly there are >1 posters that want to keep posting in that thread, why do you think that your personal view of the world should take precedence over the people posting in that thread?
I try to keep mine spread out in enough threads, many not started by me, that I hope no one will notice.
I’m sorry, but that is a stupid response. Why don’t we let 10 year old resurrected threads stay open because some people like to make zombie jokes?
It is not a stupid response at all, please answer the question.
And while you’re at it please answer your own. Why don’t we let the thread stay open? If people are enjoying their zombie jokes, what is it to the the rest of us if we’re not? Seriously… Very seriously: your attitude baffles me utterly.
I, for one, have opened the never ending pigeon saga thread, once, I believe, and can’t remember ever posting in it. But I will post unto death my support (not the right) of its continuation. Let SDMB crumble (God Forbid) but those Internet bytes must go on.
There is a special providence in the fall of a pigeon.
I’ll type slower this time.
There are >1 people that would like the thread to remain open.
You want to prevent the >1 people from continuing to post in a thread they are choosing to.
Why do you feel you should be able to prevent people from interacting in a way that doesn’t impact you at all?
It is an unconsidered presumption shared pretty widely around here. It is the unconsidered part that needs addressing… I, for one, would love to see what Dopers could come up with if challenged to make logical, rational, just arguments in answer to this question.
As I think I’ve made clear, the only rational argument that I can come up with has nothing to do with Dopers, only moderators, because moderators are the only straight dope users who are actually required to visit those threads. At least I assume they are required to…I don’t know, are moderators required to skim every thread or do they simply respond to complaints? My presumption is the former, because sans complaints, even the moderators could skip it and leave the people enjoying the thread others would see shut down to their enjoyment, whatever it looks like.
No. twickster has even said in posts in which she is acting as a mod that she is not going to go back and read the thread and just tells everyone in genereal to knock it off.
I hesitate to chime in, because I have no problem with either the pigeon or global warming threads and wouldn’t want to see them closed. But to your general question of what purpose it serves to close any thread: the types of threads and discourse on the board do impact me (and all of us) even if I don’t read a particular thread.
Take the example of a thread that has wandered far off course. Yes, there are people still participating in it. But if I come along and see a subject of A in which I have interest, I have wasted my time if the topic is now B. Or I confuse the thread by posting about A when everyone else is talking about B. Conversely, maybe I’m interested in B and never open the thread because I assume it’s still about A. There are way more threads on this board than I could ever read, so I like that I can (usually) have a decent idea about the thread topic before I start. I’m fine with a mod closing the thread and suggesting a new thread on the new topic in this case.
For threads where the OP is not discussing a topic in good faith or is simply trolling or the topic has devolved into a repeated circle of arguments, I think it’s also fine to close them. Yes, I could simply stay out of it and let the people still posting enjoy it. But my experience on the board is enhanced because I know I won’t find too many threads like that and threads I choose to read will typically have some quality.
Please don’t take this as an argument for being quick on the close trigger. I agree there has to be a damn good reason for closing a thread.
We are required to actively participate in the forums that we moderate. We are not required to read (or skim) every thread. We’re not just moderators. We are also users, just like you. We read posts and participate in threads for our own enjoyment. We will generally read a majority of the threads in the forums that we moderate simply because they interest us, but most of us don’t have the time to read through every single thread, even just to skim it.
We don’t just sit around and wait for complaints. Since we are participants in the forums that we moderate, we will often come across problematic posts as we read through threads that interest us. But if we happen not to read a particular thread, we do rely on post reports to let us know if there is a problem there.
When someone reports a post, we get an e-mail with details about the report. We very much appreciate post reports, as they often allow us to respond more quickly to issues even when we would have stumbled across the problematic post on our own eventually.
Well, this is the heart of the matter, innit? Mods are given and exercise discretion for a reason. There is just no way to moderate thousands of threads otherwise. Many zombie threads are left open. They understand that people happen upon this MB from Google, etc. and are not conversant with the rules, much less the culture of the board. And yes, I agree that new posters should get up to speed on those things, but guess what? Good luck battling human nature.
There is a list of reasons for thread closings by Dex here. The last one is
I decline to believe that Dex put that in off-the-cuff, without extensive discussion among the mods. In my experience, the mods are fair and even-handed. I was satisfied with Miller’s reasoning for not closing the AGW RULES! thread. Frankly, I was fascinated to read it. I disagree in that case - I think it possible that the thread and what is taking place in it reflects a bit poorly on the Board. That’s my opinion. Carries exactly the same weight, neither more nor less, than anyone else’s.
Okay - have at me.
ETA : I know where I’m not going to be going for a little light reading for a while after this post. <Bows>