# Re: Closure of the Big T thread. **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [May 21, 2010, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301 "2010-05-21T20:35:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Buckeye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9f8e36/32.png) [@Buckeye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buckeye)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/61 "2010-05-23T03:24:49Z")
You know twickster, that apology might mean something if you had quit typing after the words, I apologize. ---
**Author:** ![Buckeye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9f8e36/32.png) [@Buckeye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buckeye)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/62 "2010-05-23T03:37:23Z")
And frankly, I have searched multiple ways to come up with Elbows bitching about the mods, as twickster says, > [@](#): > > Well, other than giving Elbows yet another mod decision to get her knickers in a twist about, of course. I’m not seeing it. Care to supply links to all these instances? ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/63 "2010-05-23T03:46:55Z")
Gee, **Twickster** , I truly appreciate the effort, but I was not offended by the mention of my undergarments. I was offended by being characterized as ‘yet again complaining about a mod decision’, said undergarments aside. In ten years I have rarely ever complained about the modding on the board, and have repeatedly sided with the mods, as I did in the **BigT** thread under discussion. Not only was it uncalled for, but a terribly unfair characterization of my posting history here. And, to be clear, I didn’t open this thread to complain about the modding, but to ask for clarification. As this kind of thread closure, leaving posters cited by the OP in his final post, unable to respond, I have never seen before. I have to admit this thread has been extremely elucidating for me. I still fail to see how the thread being 4 pages long is pertinent, or whether people were reiterating, for that matter. Or how a mod can ‘know’ that none of the 7 cited posters wanted to respond or would have said anything new. And I never will. Because although I came to the right forum, asked politely and respectfully, a valid question, the first two mods into the thread, within 25 mins just stopped by to make cheap jokes, feeling no need to address the issue raised. When you finally responded it was three sentences, 25 words, including the aforementioned ‘it was four pages long’ and ‘no one had anything new to say, so I closed it’. Not even an attempt to address the points I was raising. I repeatedly asked several direct questions of the mods pertaining to this issue, always politely and respectfully, and none felt the need to respond. So, while I learned nothing about the issue I raised or how it can be justified as fair to the other posters in that thread, I have, indeed, learned a great deal about the moderation of this board today. Oh, and that an obtuse almost apology excuses a personal attack, in moderator world. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 7:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/64 "2010-05-23T07:39:18Z")
So, is it okay to make comments of that nature about another Doper now in ATMB? May we follow **twickster’s** example without getting a mod note or a Warning? The comments would have to be limited to the words that **twickster** used and did not find insulting. > [@](#): > > **AClockworkMelon** : They enforce the rules and perform board maintenance. Closing threads at the request of OPs is part of that maintenance. Don’t count on it! It won’t always happen that way. > [@](#): > > **Czarcasm** : But what if any and/or all of said posters said something the OP feels a need to respond to? Where does it stop? Why do you feel the respondants, and not the OP, should have the last word? It doesn’t matter to me who has the last word. What is important is that everyone gets to talk things out as long as the individual is abiding by the rules. If the subject matter becomes an honest to goodness train wreck, it should be closed. If _anyone_ is being psychologically abused and is already mentally ill (as happened a couple of years ago), the thread should be closed. I’m sure there are other good reasons for closing a thread. I personally disagree with **twickster** on this one. Once an OP has asked that a thread be closed, she or he should be expected not to post again. Closed is closed. I too liked Ed’s way of closing down. He gave a deadline. That seemed to please a lot of people. But if the conversation is being productive, why stop? “You can’t always get what you want, but if you try sometimes you just might find you get what you need.” – The Rolling Stones ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 8:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/65 "2010-05-23T08:22:56Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > I raised a valid point, I was polite and respectful. I am not doing anything other than asking for clarification. > [@elbows](#): > > * * * > > I was offended by being characterized as ‘yet again complaining about a mod decision’, said undergarments aside. > > * * * > > And, to be clear, I didn’t open this thread to complain about the modding, but to ask for clarification. > > * * * > [@elbows](#): > > What the Hell? This is not a polite statement. The rules don’t require it to be, which makes me all the more puzzled about why you would bother to characterize it as polite. > [@](#): > > How is that okay? I would not have a problem with it being closed before Big T’s latest post. If he wanted. But to come in and respond to all those posters, basically telling them they just don’t get it, and then, before they can respond, thread closed. This doesn’t look like you were asking for a clarification. It looks like you were complaining about moderation. Once again, this is the forum for complaints about moderation. I don’t get why you need to say this. I came to this thread ready to dig in and give it an objective look (I’ve not looked at any of this stuff until just now), but so far, I think we are looking at two different threads. Point me to the one you were describing in the quotes and I’ll take a look. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 8:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/66 "2010-05-23T08:58:18Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > With all due respect, this isn’t about what your response would have been. It’s about the protocol of closing a thread before the other participants had an opportunity to respond to your final post. > > I’ve not seen that done before. In the past, threads were not closed **only** because the OP requested it, other posters were given the opportunity to respond before closing. Because it’s not really fair to let the OP post the final word, quoting 7 previous posts, and not give those cited the chance to respond. > > Again, just to be clear, it’s not about whether you’d have cared/read/responded. Nor is it about the length of the thread, or whether people were reiterating something previously covered. > > Nor should it be about any other complaint about modding that I, or anyone else, has had over other issues. (In this case, completely unfounded as I have very rarely ever taken issue with the modding, in ten years as a poster. It was a straight up, gratuitous, unfounded insult, by a mod, in a forum where posters are forbidden from doing same.) > > Oh, and sorry about the misspelling of your name, BigT. Not that you care, of course. My bad. I was not trying to take the thread off topic. I honestly agree with you that people should be allowed to respond to a thread before it is closed. I already mentioned how I think that could be handled. And I agree with you that **twickster** ’s comment was inappropriate. Not because of the words used, but because it unnecessarily implied that you were a concern troll. You are most definitely not. And such an insult from a moderator carries a lot more weight. Like I said, they have jackhammers. ---
**Author:** ![Ostrya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/35a633/32.png) [@Ostrya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ostrya)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 9:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/67 "2010-05-23T09:41:18Z")
> [@twickster](#): > > Yes, I shouldn’t have made the crack about **elbows** ’s knickers. **elbows** , I apologize for bringing your undergarments into it. This is not an apology. It is a smartass comment. ---
**Author:** ![leander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bcef8e/32.png) [@leander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leander)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 10:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/68 "2010-05-23T10:59:53Z")
> [@twickster](#): > > Yes, I shouldn’t have made the crack about **elbows** ’s knickers. **elbows** , I apologize for bringing your undergarments into it. My son also has a problem taking responsiblity for his actions. When he makes a mistake, instead of apologising and owning his actions, he lashes out. I think he realizes that he fucked up (and sees that others realize this too), is embarrassed by it, and this makes him angry. So he makes a silly fuss instead of simply making a sincere apology. We’re trying very hard to teach him that it’s OK to make a mistake and be sorry for it. Of course, my son is only 3 years old…but still, it’s never too late to learn. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/69 "2010-05-23T12:44:17Z")
I’m sorry you found the word ‘hell’ so impolite, please substitute ‘heck’, if you like. > [@](#): > > This doesn’t look like you were asking for a clarification. It looks like you were complaining about moderation. Once again, this is the forum for complaints about moderation. I don’t get why you need to say this. > > I came to this thread ready to dig in and give it an objective look (I’ve not looked at any of this stuff until just now), but so far, I think we are looking at two different threads. Point me to the one you were describing in the quotes and I’ll take a look. Sorry, but this completely baffles me. Two different threads? What are you talking about, I don’t understand? The thread, in question has already been linked to, up thread, if that helps you out. And though I repeatedly pointed out I wasn’t complaining about the moderation, only seeking clarification, you still feel I was complaining? See, I don’t know what else I could do. The only thing I was complaining about was that no mod addressed the actual issue I raised, answered any of the direct questions asked, and that I was personally attacked. I’m truly sorry you don’t seem to understand, but, quite honestly I can’t fathom why. I think I was polite and respectful and had a valid issue to discuss. I made numerous attempts to engage a moderator to help me understand an application of thread closure that I had not seen before and that struck me as not really fair to the posters cited by BigT. in his final post. The other people in this thread don’t seem to be having the understanding difficulties that you are experiencing. I’d love to help you understand and clear this up but, honestly, I’ve repeated myself several times, and I just don’t see how it could be made any clearer. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/70 "2010-05-23T13:27:31Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > I’m sorry you found the word ‘hell’ so impolite, please substitute ‘heck’, if you like. The tone of the OP was not polite. Neither was the diction. You’ve misrepresented your own post. Changing it now doesn’t help me understand why you needed to misrepresent it in the first place, it merely leads me to conclude you did it on purpose. Similarly, the OP in no way seeks clarification. You are clearly complaining about the thread closing: > [@](#): > > What the Hell? > > How is that okay? I would not have a problem with it being closed before Big T’s latest post. If he wanted. But to come in and respond to all those posters, basically telling them they just don’t get it, and then, before they can respond, thread closed. What am I missing? What were you asking to have clarified in the OP of this thread? ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/71 "2010-05-23T13:36:35Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > With all due respect, this isn’t about what your response would have been. It’s about the protocol of closing a thread before the other participants had an opportunity to respond to your final post. If this is the clarification you sought. Allow me to clarify. We do not have a “protocol” for closing threads. We take them on a case-by-case basis, and the analysis is forum-dependent. I’m now reviewing the previous thread. ---
**Author:** ![bucketybuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@bucketybuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bucketybuck)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/72 "2010-05-23T13:44:48Z")
> [@twickster](#): > > Yes, I shouldn’t have made the crack about **elbows** ’s knickers. **elbows** , I apologize for bringing your undergarments into it. Folks, these are your mods. Classy arent they. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/73 "2010-05-23T13:52:08Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I doesn’t bother me that you want to respond. If the mods want to let you, that would be fine. Here is my problem. You made that long post and then immediately (two minutes later according to the time stamps on your last post and the thread report requesting closure. That makes it look like you really were trying to game the system so that you could have the last word. Next time you want to leave a discussion, please don’t do it that way. ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/74 "2010-05-23T14:08:00Z")
Well, I’m sorry that you feel that way. Of course, people can interpret things differently, and while you feel I was, in fact, not being polite, I feel I was polite and respectful. As no one else, in 70 posts, seems to think I wasn’t being polite, perhaps it’s just you. Everyone is certainly entitled to an opinion, especially on something as nebulous as tone. As evidence I would offer your own posts here which exhibit a very hostile and combative tone, though I’m certain you don’t see it that way. If find this, however, to be completely disingenuous: > [@](#): > > Similarly, the OP in no way seeks clarification. when this is what I repeatedly asked: > [@](#): > > So I’ll ask the other mods, is it just me, or is this a break from protocol wherein other posters are first given a chance to respond before a thread is closed, even when requested by the OP? > > Do you think it’s okay to close a thread because it’s 4 pages long? Or because you don’t feel anything new is being added? Shouldn’t the OP have been told that yes, the thread would be closed, but not until the (7) posters addressed in his final post were given an opportunity to respond? > [@](#): > > How is that okay? I would not have a problem with it being closed before Big T’s latest post. If he wanted. But to come in and respond to all those posters, basically telling them they just don’t get it, and then, before they can respond, thread closed. > [@](#): > > I just am wondering why they would close a thread where the OP directly addresses the responses of 7 different participants, and then gets the thread closed before any of them get to respond to him. That doesn’t seem right to me. > > I don’t think I’ve seen such a thing before and just want to understand the thinking… it’s about denying interested posters to opportunity to respond to the points raised in the OP’s last post. > [@](#): > > Something new might have been added if you hadn’t closed it. I think that people, especially when there are 7 of them, should have the opportunity to rebut whether they ‘understand’ or not. > [@](#): > > I’ve not seen that done before. In the past, threads were not closed only because the OP requested it, other posters were given the opportunity to respond before closing. Because it’s not really fair to let the OP post the final word, quoting 7 previous posts, and not give those cited the chance to respond. > [@](#): > > I have no problem with OP’s being able to request a thread be closed. It’s long been the policy and I have no issue with it. But I’ve never seen it applied in this way before. > > So, would you be okay with an OP making a last post, quoting a dozen previous posts from the thread, claiming they are foolish, lame, misguided, garbage, pish, and then asking to have the thread closed? > > It’s one thing to say, ‘I’d like to have my thread closed’, and entirely another to come into the thread, make a post that cites 7 previous poster’s posts, and then asking for it to be shut, before anyone can respond. You really don’t see the difference? > > Yes, another thread could be started but that would be enormously inconvenient in this case. It would require lots of linking/quoting. It’s not just like someone has something else to add, but that, potentially, 7 posters may wish the opportunity to respond. And it should be afforded to them, in my opinion. Pretty clearly not a complaint, a request for clarification. If you are being sincere perhaps you’d like to address the personal attack that characterized me as having yet another complaint about mod actions, when nothing could be further from the truth. > [@](#): > > And frankly, I have searched multiple ways to come up with Elbows bitching about the mods, as twickster says, > Quote: > Well, other than giving Elbows yet another mod decision to get her knickers in a twist about, of course. > I’m not seeing it. Care to supply links to all these instances? I asked Twickster for a cite, when she made this remark, but, of course, she failed to respond. After much objection I was offered an apology for having mentioned my knickers.:dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/75 "2010-05-23T14:10:39Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > My proposal is to do what Ed did that one time. Say something like “The OP has asked for the thread to be closed. If you have anything else to respond, you have until time X, when I will close it.” Actually, that was me (although I think Ed may have done it once or twice). I may have done the same in this case, too. In the Pit, where the presumption is that threads stay open unless there is a good reason, that makes even more sense. OTOH, I’ve also pointed out several times that anybody who disagrees with a thread closing need only start a thread here requesting reopening (or PM or email me). In the now-closed thread, it seems like the comments to which you responded were mostly about you–and not about the rules. That makes the case for this approach somewhat weaker. Moreover, the OP of this thread has said she isn’t interested in posting in the other thread (please correct me if I am wrong about this) and none of the other participants have requested that we reopen it (this too). So I’m not sure I see a point to reopening it. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/76 "2010-05-23T14:13:55Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > when this is what I repeatedly asked: Which of these quotes is from your OP? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/77 "2010-05-23T14:18:52Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > I asked Twickster for a cite, when she made this remark, but, of course, she failed to respond. > > After much objection I was offered an apology for having mentioned my knickers.:dubious: I’d like to focus on your OP and your request for clarification. If you want to raise that issue, you may start a thread about it. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/78 "2010-05-23T14:22:17Z")
I posted this in The Pit almost exactly a year ago. To the extent I have a thread closing “protocol” this is it: > [@](#): > > Here’s my current thinking on thread closures, generally. These are not rules at all, they are just an explanation of how I think about requests to close or reopen a thread. > > 1. They are procedural. In most cases, nobody has a right to have a thread open or closed. It’s about convenience and efficiency. There are some special cases, in which there may be a great reason to close a thread, but in most cases, those reasons are based on some more substantive concern. > > 2. Starting a thread that gets closed isn’t going to draw any sort of warning from me unless there’s something else going on. I might warn somebody for trolling or opening a thread that I’ve specifically told them not to open, but beyond that, it’s just a procedural thing. > > 3. I’m always willing to reconsider a thread closing or refusal to close a thread. As I said, it’s procedural, and it’s not a big deal. > > 4. I usually start with the assumption that the thread stays open and need to be convinced that it needs to be closed. But this is a procedural assumption, I don’t think there is a right answer in most of these cases. > > 5. If I close a thread, that doesn’t imply that another thread can’t be started on the same topic. > > 6. Unless there’s a good reason to close a thread immediately, I try to give folks an opportunity to make that last post or convince me to leave the thread open. > > 7. I’ve got limited time and attention, so if a thread is very long, I’m more inclined to close it, subject to all of the other stuff I’ve said. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11173361&postcount=188](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11173361&postcount=188) I’ll add that paragraph 4 might be a little misleading as applied to ATMB. When I moderate in ATMB, I still apply it, but there are more good reasons to close threads in this forum than in The Pit. ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/79 "2010-05-23T14:32:06Z")
> [@](#): > > Which of these quotes is from your OP? > > I’d like to focus on your OP and your request for clarification. Add in your addressing a ‘moderator note’ to **BigT** , here in my thread, and it’s just getting too silly for me. Wherein you basically did seem to understand the point I was making, for all your earlier claims.:dubious: It’s pretty clear that you’re just being disingenuous and obtuse, in my opinion. I can see that there will be no correction of the grossly uncalled for misrepresentation of my posting history, by a mod, leveled at me for daring to ask some simple questions. ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301/80 "2010-05-23T14:40:33Z")
> [@](#): > > 1. Unless there’s a good reason to close a thread immediately, I try to give folks an opportunity to make that last post or convince me to leave the thread open. This is the issue! What you’ve written above is the protocol I’ve previously witnessed, and was specifically not applied in the case being discussed in this thread. Hence the discussion and request for clarification. Did you even read what you posted?:dubious: Sillier and sillier it seems! Clearly we’re not going to get anywhere here. I’ve done my best to try and be polite and to get clarification, but we’re just going in circles. You win, I’m done. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-closure-of-the-big-t-thread/540301.md?page=5)