Closing of threads....

[Tony Gambino]

I think you all are missing the bigger picture.........I'm still banned in chat!!

[All4U]

Originally Posted by chipper

This is a really tough topic. I have not read the post in question but I will say, in general, we will have just as many people complaining because we do not close some threads quickly enough. Damned if you do and Damned if you don't. There is a fine line there and I haven't found it yet. Most of the time I couldn't even tell you who made me close a thread. I try not to let personalities get involved.

I find this to be a great response to the subject matter.

Updated point 15 for this thread.

[lilred_robin]

Originally Posted by sixxbach

so robin, what do u think about the topic?

sixx

What topic?

[novacain]

Ok, to get this train wreck of a thread back on track, Sixx asked a question: Why was Tony's latest theAd closed as soon as it was opened by the mods?
Answer:
1. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=258658 - closed

2. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=246911 - open

3. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=249271 - closed but allowed to run it's course with a final post by a mod explaining everything.

4. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=210919 - open

These threads are particularly good as he insults the very mods in control of his being reinstated.
5. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=230224 - open despite the insulting of the chat mods

6. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=227056 - open and again with an explanation from a chat mod as to why he was banned

His threads asking why he was banned, seems he was told why.
7. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=187888 - closed but also allowed to run with responses by both an owner and chat mod

8. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=185821 - open
9. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=185816 - open

Ok, all the above threAds have the same basic topic, Tony being banned from chat. Out of the 9 threads 6 are still currently open, I agree with the mods, there really was no need for a 10th thread on the subject. While there is no direct rule in the forum guidelines, it's pretty well known that action will be taken against spam on most any site.

So there you have it Sixx, your answer, or shall I dig up threads from when you were an Austin mod to show how you as a mod steered threads along for your own amusement and fodder? Or your threAds whining about your current ban in chat showing your true reasons for joining in on this? Done in another thread of course since it's not the subject of this thread.

[Jules Jaguar]

Originally Posted by novacain

Ok, to get this train wreck of a thread back on track, Sixx asked a question: Why was Tony's latest theAd closed as soon as it was opened by the mods?
Answer:
1. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=258658 - closed

2. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=246911 - open

3. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=249271 - closed but allowed to run it's course with a final post by a mod explaining everything.

4. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=210919 - open

These threads are particularly good as he insults the very mods in control of his being reinstated.
5. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=230224 - open despite the insulting of the chat mods

6. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=227056 - open and again with an explanation from a chat mod as to why he was banned

His threads asking why he was banned, seems he was told why.
7. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=187888 - closed but also allowed to run with responses by both an owner and chat mod

8. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=185821 - open
9. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=185816 - open

Ok, all the above threAds have the same basic topic, Tony being banned from chat. Out of the 9 threads 6 are still currently open, I agree with the mods, there really was no need for a 10th thread on the subject. While there is no direct rule in the forum guidelines, it's pretty well known that action will be taken against spam on most any site.

So there you have it Sixx, your answer, or shall I dig up threads from when you were an Austin mod to show how you as a mod steered threads along for your own amusement and fodder? Or your threAds whining about your current ban in chat showing your true reasons for joining in on this? Done in another thread of course since it's not the subject of this thread.

POW BISHES!!!!

[bigdog0311]

great research, novacain!

[Guest021812-3]

Looks like Tony is now banned in more places than just chat.

[sixxbach]

Cool novacain. Glad to see that you have the time to do this. It is much appreciated. I asked a simple question. I did not make any assumptions. The point of a message board of any kind is to stimulate conversation whether we agree with the OP or not. There were some potshots taken that were not needed and attempts to take this off topic that unfortunately needed moderator attention. If anyone wants to take shots at me join me in the spider hole. It would be much fun

I am glad though, it was kept open. The potshots stopped but the thread was allowed to continue. You don't have to research anything else. Of course you may but you won't find a thread complaining about the mods being heavy handed when I was a mod. The complaint there was that it was too "wild west" if you will. Kind of like this thread. People who don't agree with the OP take their shots, etc and take things off topic.

I think we can all agree that if given a choice of either A. the board being too tightly moderated or B. A "looser" approach, most would opt for B. especially this group that tried to take this off topic and/or with personal insults.

This thread was meant to stimulate conversation. In reality, isn't that the meaning of anything posted on this board?

sixx

[Guest021812-3]

Sixx,

Your second post on this thread called Ze a "tard", but now you want to get holier than thou and bitch about people taking "pot shots"?

Also, there is a marked difference between passive aggressiveness (see your posts bitching about Bubba prematurely closing this thread) and cleverness. I'd try and explain it, but judging on how literally you took POD's humor, it'd be a lost cause.

[sixxbach]

Originally Posted by TheBizz

Sixx,

Your second post on this thread called Ze a "tard", but now you want to get holier than thou and bitch about people taking "pot shots"?

Also, there is a marked difference between passive aggressiveness (see your posts bitching about Bubba prematurely closing this thread) and cleverness. I'd try and explain it, but judging on how literally you took POD's humor, it'd be a lost cause.

I only responded to her shot. I should not have done that. My bad. I am always one to call myself out. So yup, I should not have kept it going. It stopped so its all good.

I wasn't bitching just stating the obvious.

sixx

[Guest082216-1]

Again, lets not go back to the fault finding, insults, etc. I let things get out of hand once, won't happen again. :-)

[Chevalier]

Originally Posted by sixxbach

The complaint there was that it was too "wild west" if you will. Kind of like this thread. People who don't agree with the OP take their shots, etc and take things off topic.

I think we can all agree that if given a choice of either A. the board being too tightly moderated or B. A "looser" approach, most would opt for B. especially this group that tried to take this off topic and/or with personal insults.

This thread was meant to stimulate conversation. In reality, isn't that the meaning of anything posted on this board?

Confirmation bias, perhaps? We all tend to believe that most others share our opinions about how tight or loose moderation should be. Your assumption about "most" people and "we all can agree" is not necessarily accurate.

More importantly, the point of this board is not to stimulate discussion -- it's to make a profit. In that respect, it's up to the owners (and the mods on their behalf) to maintain the right level that will maximize membership and profit. They might not get it right, but it's the same for any business -- the owners make the call. If they get it wrong, they'll suffer the consequences. In that respect, it's a purely utilitarian decision -- not whether closing threads, banning Tony, etc. Are "right" but whether they're "effective." And for the most part, all we can do is guess. Although I assume the owners and staff have access to more information in the form of RTM and private communications.

[Guest082216-1]

Once again an interesting post but nothing to do with the orginal topic. Since people seem to be having problems finding any more to say on the topic, the call is yours sixx to keep it open or close this one out.

[sixxbach]

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm in true sixxbach fashion, I will steer the direction. You can close it Bubba, thanks for your patience and good job modding in all seriousness.

Ze, Jules, and your Wk's, I will let you know what Cowboys games I will be in town for, we can do lunch.....

sixx

[Guest082216-1]

Closed at OP request