None of us have paid since the move to Discourse three years ago. I’ve never had a notification about a limited number of threads per day.
Johnny was being a bit facetious. He was making the point that there is no thread limit here so there’s no harm in spinoff threads.
The subscription system is still broken. If you were in either the Member user group or the Charter Member user group, there is nothing in the system that will remove you from those groups. So even though you haven’t paid, you still get the benefits of that group (mainly, no ads on the message board).
That is a great turn of phrase. Thank you! The cartoon was good too.
I and certainly others understand that but it’s generated THIS thread. We think the judgement calls are a bit on the quick side. There’s a lot of potential in discussing the use of outdated arms as a current event and you shut it down.
Well, the good news is that starting new threads doesn’t seem to be an issue for people.
We? You mean you. Not everyone agrees with you. I certainly don’t.
Is this true? Can the mods give us some stats about new threads being started and actually being used when shut down in the main thread?
It may be confirmation bias on my part, but it seems like spin off threads generally die a quick death because the subject is so narrow. Even the threads that mods split posts off to do not seem to do so well.
In this case I don’t really care, but it seems like it was modding the opposite of all the other weapons discussions that were allowed in that thread. Heck. there have been quite a few posts about F16 fighters in that thread and there are not even any of them in the conflict. Why weren’t those shut down?
Why is that a problem? If a narrow question is answered, why should it continue for several more posts? Post count is not a measure of thread quality.
Long threads can be a real deterrent to participation. If I see a thread with 100+ posts that I haven’t been in from the start, I’m not likely to join and wade through everything to get caught up. But I’ll open any 10-post thread on an interesting topic (and even many on boring topics).
I don’t know if I’d call it a problem, but it seems like people don’t like to follow 10 threads when one could be followed instead. Let the question play out in the original thread instead of declaring a hijack after 5 or 6 posts. Much less work for mods and posters.
Again, I don’t really care about this except for the inconsistency in modding. If discussion is allowed for 50 weapons, even ones that aren’t involved in the war, suddenly deciding that you can’t discuss this one weapon is inconsistent. What made this one different from all the others , by the mods judgement call, that it had to be shut down?
Because we can continue to enjoy the conversation.
Or not, because sooner or later (mostly sooner) some pedantic know-it-all (like me) would make a snide remark about how the Mosin-Nagant kicks like a mule or about the supposed benefits of the Russian 7.62X39mm round over the NATO 5.56mm and we’d be so deep in the rough it would take 4 strokes and a compass to get back on track.
Him & me. We are not alone.
No I mean the op who started the thread and those who agree. The fact that the thread exists is an indication that some people NOT YOU thinks the thread in question be given more leeway. It’s not like we’re trying to throw What Exit under the bus. Everyone has acknowledged the need for Mods and appreciate their efforts.
Despite the poisoned well title, right?
How is that a poisoned well? How would you change the title in a thread about moderating a specific thread?
The title assumes the answer. It’s a push-poll.
A neutral poll question would be: Does What Exit’s moderation in the Ukraine war thread improve it or degrade it?
never mind… not worth the trouble.
Take out “heavy-handed”.
“Does What Exit’s heavy-handed moderation in the Ukraine war thread improve it or degrade it” shows a clear bias. People will read that title and go into the thread assuming What Exit’s heavy-handed moderation is problematic (at least WRT that thread). Even if you only posted the poll and left your OP out of it, the well has been poisoned.
However, “Does What Exit’s moderation in the Ukraine war thread improve it or degrade it” sounds like you’re genuinely seeking opinions and, based just on that title, doesn’t show a clear indication of your feelings on the subject one way or the other. (At least not beyond the fact that the thread was created in the first place. )
If we change it so it’s not SDMB related, look at the difference between:
Is my boss helping or hurting productivity?
and
Is my micro-managing boss helping or hurting productivity?
Fair enough. I can see that.
Maybe the op can agree to the change. Or add the word “is” to it. Is What Exit’s moderation in the Ukrainian war thread heavy handed? And does it improve the thread?
Despite the leading question, the large majority of posters are in favor of the way WE is handling that thread. I’m not sure what you think changing the title will do at this point.