I was unaware that there was a clock running on all threads, or that we were down to the final few seconds. As I understood it, threads are closed because there’s no further interest in the subject anymore, or the thread has gone way off-topic, or descended into abuse, or something resembling a reason. I still was interested in reading it, for one, and I still felt I had a point to make in it, eventually.
But this one was closed down because–why, again? I suspect because the continued discussion was something of an embarassment to the SDMB staff, which is silly because nothing seems to embarrass anyone around here.
Because something on the order of 1/4 to 1/3d of all ATMB threads dealing with these issues are closed by fiat. “Well, we need closure” or “Asked and answered” or “One of our small number of obsequious, sycophantic buttmonkeys* successfully caused a hijack so now this thread is now inappropriate for ATMB.” or “I think this discussion is over” or my personal favorite and yours, "Enough. Dammit, don’t you have homes to go to? It’s Christmas, give it a break. "
This is par for the course. It’s a great way of preserving the illusion that dissent and criticism is welcome without actually…y’know, allowing it.
*Note, since this isn’t directed at any specific poster, it’s perfectly fine under standards established in the aforementioned thread.
I’d suggest being careful Garfield—someone got warned for doing exactly what you just did. Actually I think he was suspended. “Imitating a mod in jest” is apparently a double-secret mega-warnable offense.
shrug I thought about putting in a disclaimer, but the fact that it says “Guest” under my name and not “Moderator” should be disclaimer enough for any half-intelligent person. Though I do know the rules and enforcement thereof sometimes suggest that the level of intelligence and behavior expected by some moderators and admins here is something less than that.
Anyhow, I apologize for continuing and perhaps provoking the hijack. It was a moment of lightheartedness in a place that used to be that way quite a lot more frequently than it seems to be these days.
Actually, I thought your response was hysterical–I laughed. Just wanted to give you the heads up that this seems to be one of those exciting unwritten rules that you’re expected to just know.
Well, I’d prefer to get a pony, which is slightly likelier.
Talk about inventing rules, is it not reasonable that there be some general rule for closing a thread beyond “this topic embarrasses TPTB, and we’d as soon you had no place to discuss it further”? If someone can suggest a category the thread in question belongs in which would qualify it as “Oh, sure, this one just had to be closed” I’d be grateful to be let in on it.
One thing I was curious about was that it was closed without Colibri’s warnings being addressed. I thought it was pretty clear that the posters being warned hadn’t actually done what he warned them for, and now that the thread is closed, that might not be addressed.
That’s what I thought, yes. Plus, you know me, I like to have things end on a kumbaya note.
Absent a statement to the contrary, closing a thread isn’t meant to suggest the topic and all related topics are now off limits. If someone feels there are unresolved issues, they’re free to open another thread.
Honestly, nothing will be done. That’s just the 3rd warning I’ve received in the last month that was completely invented by a moderator. I have every confidence that nothing will be done about that one just like nothing has been or will be done about the other two.
I’ve been here for a short time compared to some but didn’t get warned for anything until last month. Now (because I’ve been vocal about criticisms of some mod/admin decisions lately) I’ve had three warnings that are completely ridiculous. It’s not hard to figure out why.
You know, some, and not just the most cynical, might read that response and wonder “Why the fuck didn’t he just respond right then and there?” I mean if Astral Rejection starts another thread titled “Could you please address Colibri’s warnings” is it like some magic key that will allow you to actually address the question?
I’m not able answer for Ed on this one, but I’d speculate that he posted it at 5:08 pm Chicago time (and nearly an hour after AR’s post) because that’s the end of the work day, when he migh otherwise have been attending to meetings and whatnot, and he’d only recently returned to the board. Personally I like your theory better.
