# Spectre of Pithecanthropus \[regarding closing thread on banning posters by popular vote\] **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [October 8, 2010, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427 "2010-10-08T00:10:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/1 "2010-10-08T00:10:17Z")
So exactly why was it neccessary to lock down this[poll](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=580802) This is what you said > [@](#): > > I don’t see any moderator comments, so I may as well step in with a comment before I put this thread out of its misery. > > First of all, even in a traditional private club you usually can’t be blackballed once you pass the pledge or prospect stage. To be permanently vulnerable to blackballing would be ridiculous. And besides, that’s what we have banning for (as well as suspensions, which didn’t use to be the case). > > As for letting people slide, mentioned in the OP, this occasionally does happen, but if so it’s because this is a huge, busy place and our eyes aren’t everywhere at once. Just as often, certain people profess unpopular or offensive views–but still stay within the rules. We can discipline members for direct insults (except in the Pit), but not for expressing views espoused by only 1% of the people, again provided they’re not trolling which is a different issue. > > Given the number of people who’ve voted, and the overwhelming result so far–185 to 12 against, I think this poll and thread have served their purpose and I’m going to close it. If anyone thinks there’s a good reason not to do this, please let me or one of the other mods in this forum know. > > For the Straight Dope > > Spectre of Pithecanthropus Because the thread has served its purpose ? Well it is my thread and yes it has served its purpose(even though you never asked me) What gets me is that these poll threads including ones that I’ve started do have a short life, disappear and that’s the end of it. Usually, locking a thread has a very good reason for it. Using the excuse of “it served its purpose” is normally used to avoid inevitable rancour. We’ve had thousands of threads that have served their purpose. gone off the rails and persist. The pro bono thread for example. That certainly wasn’t a problem in this case. The thread in question was only 3 days old. Just what were you trying to thwart by locking this thread? ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/2 "2010-10-08T00:41:48Z")
Were I still an IMHO mod, earlier in my career I would have closed it as soon as I saw it, on the grounds that the comments in such a poll would verge on a popularity contest. Such threads are troublesome, and turn into attacks and defenses of popular and unpopular posters, such posts (in general) being more suited for the Pit. The alternative is to issue notes and warnings to those who cannot stay on subject, and cannot resist naming names. In that type of thread, that approach tends to turn into a blizzard of **Moderator Notes**. Neither of these actions are popular. What approach would you suggest to keep the poll a poll, and not argument about specific posters? ---
**Author:** ![Oregon\_sunshine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/50afbb/32.png) [@Oregon\_sunshine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oregon_sunshine)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/3 "2010-10-08T02:27:48Z")
“Voting people off” of _anything_ is a reprehensible concept. “Reality” television has done nothing but bad to our society. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/4 "2010-10-08T02:49:59Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > Because the thread has served its purpose ? > > Well it is my thread and yes it has served its purpose(even though you never asked me) I’m not sure exactly why you’re complaining then. First of all, this is a policy that the admin of this board would never, ever, possibly consider. Second, there was overwhelming sentiment against it, from all sides of the political spectrum. > [@](#): > > Usually, locking a thread has a very good reason for it. Using the excuse of “it served its purpose” is normally used to avoid inevitable rancour. We’ve had thousands of threads that have served their purpose. gone off the rails and persist. The pro bono thread for example. > > That certainly wasn’t a problem in this case. To my eyes (who has no particular dog in this fight), it certainly was. Rancor was not only inevitable, it was already taking place. There already was considerable sniping going on between and about various posters. If I were an IMHO mod I would have considered issuing several mod notes if not warnings in that thread. It really was overdue for closing. > [@](#): > > Just what were you trying to thwart by locking this thread? That was a potential tinder box of a thread. What purpose would be served in leaving it open? You had already found out there was strong opposition to a policy that never would have been implemented. > [@](#): > > The pro bono thread for example. Not a valid comparison, since that’s a Pit thread. I suppose your thread could have been moved to the Pit, but polls aren’t enabled there. [QUOTE=Spectre of Pithecanthropus] If anyone thinks there’s a good reason not to do this, please let me or one of the other mods in this forum know. [/QUOTE] Did you contact SoP or one of the other IMHO mods to make your case before opening this thread? If not, why not? ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/5 "2010-10-08T02:53:09Z")
And incidentally, let’s not have a replay of that thread here. Please refrain from making negative comments about other specific posters in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/6 "2010-10-08T03:21:08Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > > [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > > > Because the thread has served its purpose ? > > > > Well it is my thread and yes it has served its purpose(even though you never asked me) > > I’m not sure exactly why you’re complaining then. First of all, this is a policy that the admin of this board would never, ever, possibly consider. Second, there was overwhelming sentiment against it, from all sides of the political spectrum. > > To my eyes (who has no particular dog in this fight), it certainly was. Rancor was not only inevitable, it was already taking place. There already was considerable sniping going on between and about various posters. If I were an IMHO mod I would have considered issuing several mod notes if not warnings in that thread. It really was overdue for closing. > > That was a potential tinder box of a thread. What purpose would be served in leaving it open? You had already found out there was strong opposition to a policy that never would have been implemented. > > Not a valid comparison, since that’s a Pit thread. I suppose your thread could have been moved to the Pit, but polls aren’t enabled there. > > [QUOTE=Spectre of Pithecanthropus] > If anyone thinks there’s a good reason not to do this, please let me or one of the other mods in this forum know. Did you contact SoP or one of the other IMHO mods to make your case before opening this thread? If not, why not? [/QUOTE] Actually, I don’t have a problem with the fact that **TFD** didn’t ask the IMHO mods for permission, other than the fact it probably should have gone into ATMB. There’s no clear rule violation as far as I can see. Because it had already been rolling along for awhile in IMHO, I decided to let it continue to roll, and stay where it was. By mid-morning today, after heavy voting, it was clear that the result wasn’t any less decisive so I closed it. As for “serving its purpose”, well, it’s done that. The OP has a clear result. I seem to be the first mod, if not Doper overall, to have a thread about me opened with just my name as the subject. I don’t know whether to be pleased about that or not. In the interest of clarity, though, I’m going to ask the ATMB mods to change the title to indicate what other thread we’re talking about here. , ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/7 "2010-10-08T04:49:20Z")
> [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > I seem to be the first mod, if not Doper overall, to have a thread about me opened with just my name as the subject. I don’t know whether to be pleased about that or not. In the interest of clarity, though, I’m going to ask the ATMB mods to change the title to indicate what other thread we’re talking about here. I went ahead and edited the title to clarify the subject. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/8 "2010-10-08T05:22:32Z")
> [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > > [@Colibri](#): > > > > Did you contact SoP or one of the other IMHO mods to make your case before opening this thread? If not, why not? > > Actually, I don’t have a problem with the fact that **TFD** didn’t ask the IMHO mods for permission, other than the fact it probably should have gone into ATMB. There’s no clear rule violation as far as I can see. To clarify, I wasn’t saying that **The Flying Dutchman** should have run the idea for the poll thread by the IMHO mods before opening it (although that probably would have been a good idea. I don’t think that the thread was a rule violation, just a bad idea). I was saying that, since you had asked posters who disagreed with the closing of the poll thread to contact you or one of the other IMHO mods, it would have been better for **The Flying Dutchman** to take that approach initially rather than opening this thread in ATMB. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/9 "2010-10-08T14:38:10Z")
> [@](#): > > I don’t see any moderator comments, so I may as well step in with a comment before I put this thread out of its misery. > > …Given the number of people who’ve voted, and the overwhelming result so far–185 to 12 against, I think this poll and thread have served their purpose and I’m going to close it. If anyone thinks there’s a good reason not to do this, please let me or one of the other mods in this forum know. > > For the Straight Dope > > Spectre of Pithecanthropus > [@Colibri](#): > > Did you contact SoP or one of the other IMHO mods to make your case before opening this thread? If not, why not? The invitation to contact a mod is to present a “_ **good reason not to** _” close the thread in question. I don’t have any good reasons. All I have is a question why. Besides, the invitation was not specific as to how to contact a mod. It was my understanding that questions regarding mod actions belong in ATMB. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/10 "2010-10-08T14:51:45Z")
> [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > Actually, I don’t have a problem with the fact that **TFD** didn’t ask the IMHO mods for permission, other than the fact it probably should have gone into ATMB. There’s no clear rule violation as far as I can see. I didn’t know we could do polls in ATMB > [@](#): > > Because it had already been rolling along for awhile in IMHO, I decided to let it continue to roll, and stay where it was. By mid-morning today, after heavy voting, it was clear that the result wasn’t any less decisive so I closed it. As for “serving its purpose”, well, it’s done that. The OP has a clear result. Earlier you described the thread as a misery, a purely subjective opinion. You’ve used the reason “serving its purpose” for closing the thread , as if you were holding your nose while honouring my wish to gauge the opinion of the membership. Gee, was it that horrible ? > [@](#): > > I seem to be the first mod, if not Doper overall, to have a thread about me opened with just my name as the subject. I don’t know whether to be pleased about that or not. In the interest of clarity, though, I’m going to ask the ATMB mods to change the title to indicate what other thread we’re talking about here. > > , It wasn’t intended to be about you. The title was to draw your attention. However in future I will be more specific. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/11 "2010-10-08T15:17:35Z")
> [@Oregon\_sunshine](#): > > “Voting people off” of _anything_ is a reprehensible concept. “Reality” television has done nothing but bad to our society. Worked for the ancient Athenians. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/12 "2010-10-08T17:29:57Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > > [@Oregon\_sunshine](#): > > > > “Voting people off” of _anything_ is a reprehensible concept. “Reality” television has done nothing but bad to our society. > > Worked for the ancient Athenians. And, you see what it got them? :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/13 "2010-10-08T19:05:11Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > The invitation to contact a mod is to present a “_ **good reason not to** _” close the thread in question. I don’t have any good reasons. All I have is a question why. > > Besides, the invitation was not specific as to how to contact a mod. It was my understanding that questions regarding mod actions belong in ATMB. If you have a specific question about the action of a specific moderator, the best way to resolve that issue is to contact that particular moderator directly through PM or e-mail. I’ve re-opened threads and also rescinded warnings based on PMs or e-mails from the poster in question. Since **Spectre’s** suggestion was to contact either him or one of the other IMHO mods (rather than any moderator), I think it’s pretty obvious that this implies doing so by PM or e-mail. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/14 "2010-10-08T19:07:53Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > > [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > > > Actually, I don’t have a problem with the fact that **TFD** didn’t ask the IMHO mods for permission, other than the fact it probably should have gone into ATMB. There’s no clear rule violation as far as I can see. > > I didn’t know we could do polls in ATMB > > Earlier you described the thread as a misery, a purely subjective opinion. You’ve used the reason “serving its purpose” for closing the thread , as if you were holding your nose while honouring my wish to gauge the opinion of the membership. > > Gee, was it that horrible ? > > > [@](#): > > > > I seem to be the first mod, if not Doper overall, to have a thread about me opened with just my name as the subject. I don’t know whether to be pleased about that or not. In the interest of clarity, though, I’m going to ask the ATMB mods to change the title to indicate what other thread we’re talking about here. > > > > , > > It wasn’t intended to be about you. The title was to draw your attention. However in future I will be more specific. Not about me? When the title consists of my name, and nothing else? Nevertheless, far from considering it an affront, I found that aspect of it rather amusing. Next time, though, keep in mind that we like to have descriptive thread titles, so if you must name the moderator, don’t forget to also include something to indicate his or her action that you want to discuss. A No-Click rule is generally good for thread titles–you can decide in zero clicks if you want to read the thread. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/15 "2010-10-08T19:15:12Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > Did you contact SoP or one of the other IMHO mods to make your case before opening this thread? If not, why not? By “this” thread, I thought **Colibri** meant **TFD’s** original thread. It was to that thread I was referring in my comments here. As for _this_ thread in which I am posting right now, this second, **Colibri** makes an excellent point. It would have been better if we’d been asked beforehand. IMHO, it’s a done deal now though, and I’m not going address that specific issue at this point. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2010, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/16 "2010-10-08T20:54:02Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > > [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > > > The invitation to contact a mod is to present a “_ **good reason not to** _” close the thread in question. I don’t have any good reasons. All I have is a question why. > > > > Besides, the invitation was not specific as to how to contact a mod. It was my understanding that questions regarding mod actions belong in ATMB. > > If you have a specific question about the action of a specific moderator, the best way to resolve that issue is to contact that particular moderator directly through PM or e-mail. I’ve re-opened threads and also rescinded warnings based on PMs or e-mails from the poster in question. > > Since **Spectre’s** suggestion was to contact either him or one of the other IMHO mods (rather than any moderator), I think it’s pretty obvious that this implies doing so by PM or e-mail. I wasn’t looking to resolve an issue. I wasn’t looking to re-open the thread in question. I simply wanted to ascertain the reason why a thread was locked. That the thread “has run its course” doesn’t convince me or we’d see threads locked all over the place. That the thread was miserable? What the hell does that mean? My intention was not to convince a mod to change their ruling but rather to inform myself _ **and others** _ as to what can get your thread locked. Thus , using the ATMB was my best course of action. BTW asking for mod ruling clarification in ATBM is perfectly acceptable in case you didn’t know. **Spectre** has still not addressed my question. I don’t need others to suggest explanations. I want him/her to tell me exactly what was bothering him about my thread. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/17 "2010-10-09T19:31:04Z")
The idea of “Survivor” style voting on this message board is simply not a good idea. The thread on the subject is an invitation to as to who the likely first targets would be, as well as remarks about specific individuals. Others in the thread pointed out correctly that it would encourage a mob mentality and dampen discussion. Besides, anyone can effectively “vote off” another person by using the ignore feature. ETA: (1) I think you’ll see what I mean if you re-read the other thread carefully. (2) I’m a dude. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2010, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/18 "2010-10-10T02:48:48Z")
Just as an observation – and emphatically NOT a threat, à la Melingate – there is one good LEGAL reason not to adopt “voting people off” beyond the very practical ones already advanced. The Reader and its successor owners have always been very chary of allowing members to do anything that could potentially involve it in legal action. Now, if you think about it, Members and Charter Members, as opposed to Guests, have paid an annual fee to the Reader for certain privileges – contingent on their not violating board TOS and rules, that constitutes a binding contract, enforceable at law, even though for a fairly small sum. The idea that one could lose the posting privileges they have paid for as the result of a popularity contest would be something that is at least theoretically grounds for a lawsuit. While such a thing is both unlikely and more a bit of nuisance value than a real threat to the board’s viability, allowing a paid member to be voted off as the result of a(n un)popularity contest would be indefensible – nothing in the TOS or board rules provides for loss of posting privileges for that reason. I reiterate that this is not to be construed as any sort of threat – it’s noting a potential problem with a suggestion from a legal standpoint, for what use it may be to those administering the board and making such decisions. Plus all the practical reasons of building community, building up membership, giving space to all sorts of different viewpoints, etc. It’s probably substantially more stupid an idea than the oddest of conspiracy theories, IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2010, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/19 "2010-10-10T12:51:00Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > Just as an observation – and emphatically NOT a threat, à la Melingate – there is one good LEGAL reason not to adopt “voting people off” beyond the very practical ones already advanced. The Reader and its successor owners have always been very chary of allowing members to do anything that could potentially involve it in legal action. Now, if you think about it, Members and Charter Members, as opposed to Guests, have paid an annual fee to the Reader for certain privileges – contingent on their not violating board TOS and rules, that constitutes a binding contract, enforceable at law, even though for a fairly small sum. The idea that one could lose the posting privileges they have paid for as the result of a popularity contest would be something that is at least theoretically grounds for a lawsuit. How would that be any different than banning any other paying member? I doubt very much if “being a jerk” is any more legally defensible than voting someone off the island. The Reader keeps the subscription money in either case. Although you are almost certainly correct that a threat of lawsuit is hardly more than a nuisance in any case. Bans based on unpopularity are a bad idea in any case, IMO. And not necessarily for the obvious reasons in my case. 😉 Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2010, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427/20 "2010-10-10T17:17:22Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > So exactly why was it neccessary to lock down this[poll](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=580802) > … [nice modding, imho] > > Because the thread has served its purpose ? At least in my case it did. I don’t do any more than occasionally look at polls. Opinion imho ain’t worth much. Don’t ask me why I look at and post anywhere but GQ. After all, I came here thru SD in print to dispel my ignorance. Love the net. So your OP brought me to your closed poll and I was gratified to find that my big mouth and weird ideas, if not liked, are tolerated here. I’ve been here 1+ yrs and have evolved in verbal expression. When I came on board, I was a brash young man with big ideas and the nimble fingers to prove it thru bombast. The mods here brought me to reason thru closing many of my OPs and issuing me one official Warning to get me to read the Pit rules. My lesson (learning as I write) is well summed in **BigT** ’s post in your defunct poll. > [@](#): > > Quote: > Originally Posted by Xema View Post > Right - as long as dissenting opinions are expressed in a gentle, respectful, humble way, they can be tolerated. > I’ve never understood why people seem to think this is a bad thing. It’s pretty much the reason that we have such sharp divides in this country. Heck, I seem to remember that there’s some sort of rally coming up to promote people actually being decent to the opposing side. > > It’s the first thing I learned in my speech class (which was essentially a rhetoric class.) If your audience is directly opposite of your position, you cannot go in with guns blazing and expect to convince anyone. You just create hostility. > > Don’t get me wrong, I’ve sometimes engaged in less than nice answers. But that’s because I’m wanting to express my outrage more than I’m wanting to convince someone. Or, occasionally, I assume people are on the fence, and, in that scenario, a passionate reply can often persuade. Enough said? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spectre-of-pithecanthropus-regarding-closing-thread-on-banning-posters-by-popular-vote/556427.md?page=2)