Thread locking policy

[78704]

I was reading through the Eccie Forum Guidelines looking for thread locking policy and couldn't find anything. As far as I can tell, current practice is "Hey, it's a thread, you're a mod, lock it if you wanna, no explanation required." Something less disruptive would be very welcome; any written policy at all might guide us to post in such a manner not to get threads locked.

[administrator]

78704,

You won't find a policy about locking threads because our intent is for threads to stay open. With that said, we reserve the right to lock a thread that we deem has a) run it's course b) become derailed beyond repair, or c) become a haven for "piling on" or other various infractions.

In short, if one of staff sees no value in leaving a thread open for any of the reasons mentioned, they may close it, however, you are right in that if a thread has been locked by a staff member, there should ALWAYS be an explanation given to the members concerning why the thread was locked....and you are always welcome to appeal any staff decision at any time, so long as it's handled in the appropriate manner.

I don't really buy your theory of ECCIE policy being "hey, it's a thread, I'm a mod, I'll lock it if I wanna, no explanation required" In fact, I find it rather comical and amusing. To illustrate that, point out any thread you find that has been locked with no explanation given and I'll gladly reopen it immediately. I'll assume that it had been locked by accident and if it's something that needs to be relocked, it will be-this time with the proper explanation.

St. C

[78704]

An explanation of 'run it's course' would be welcome; this particular thread, for example, was stimulated by a locker room thread it would've been a part of had that thread not been locked by you.

[administrator]

Cut to the chase. Which thread(s) are you referencing?

[Whispers]

I think if you read the boards pretty regularly you can easily ascertain that T-Bone and St Christopher really don't want to see threads locked.....

That when they are locked there should be an explanation made by the Mod that locks it TO the Community......

We are told we may at any time appeal that decision to staff....

I can assure you it works......

A Mod locked, without explanation, a COed thread earlier last week......

Because it was a thread I had started I received a half dozen emails,PMs texts from other members asking me why it was locked..... I had no idea and encouraged more than one of the people asking to PM or Email St Chris or T-Bone and ask....

Evidently they didn't...

When I got back around to the board a few days later I saw it still locked without explanation and PMd them myself and the thread was IMMEDIATELY reopened and remains open today....

Was it locked by accident? I kind of doubt it... I think that as an explanation is just a way of allowing a mod to save face after doing something he shouldn't have....

T-Bone and St. Christopher are more responsive then any ownership I've had the pleasure of communicating with over the years outside of Amber at ASPD who was on my speed dial back in the "Good Ole Days"....

If 78704 is referring to a thread that is one of mine where I was basically "calling out" another member ...... There was an explanation posted in the thread as well as a PM sent to me that I can understand as well as agree with.....

The thread presented too much of an opportunity of turning into a bash fest when in all honesty I was looking for an exchange basically between me and him.....

Although it could have been handled via PM..... I believe that my side and his side presented publicly would serve a purpose......

I should have stated I was looking for an exchange with him and not a open discussion for all others.....

With that in mind I think it would be a real cool feature to be able to set up a thread that only invited members can reply to that would still be viewable by the other members with access to that forum.... Like when debates occur but there is no audience input..... That way two people could have an exchange in public view without distraction or others "piling on"

[78704]

Originally Posted by St.Christopher

Cut to the chase. Which thread(s) are you referencing?

I said you, I meant you; the tcreative2... thread posted by Whispers.

Since you asked, I took a second look at the Marley thread tc2 locked Thursday and found his 'explanation' a little spare: "Seeing as Marley is now gone ......... so is this thread "

[78704]

Originally Posted by St.Christopher

78704,

You won't find a policy about locking threads because our intent is for threads to stay open.

Nonsense. It's not your intent to edit or delete threads either, presumably, but you have written policy for it.

With that said, we reserve the right to lock a thread that we deem has a) run it's course b) become derailed beyond repair, or c) become a haven for "piling on" or other various infractions.

That's certainly vague enough to translate into 'lock it if you wanna...' mostly because 'run it's course' is meaningless. There is no 'haven' for infractions given the RTM button, though some fora e.g. Locker Room might tolerate rougher play.

In short, if one of staff sees no value in leaving a thread open for any of the reasons mentioned, they may close it, however, you are right in that if a thread has been locked by a staff member, there should ALWAYS be an explanation given to the members concerning why the thread was locked....and you are always welcome to appeal any staff decision at any time, so long as it's handled in the appropriate manner.

Certainly this is the right forum. I'd ask why Marley's leaving is a reason to close every thread about her, both the ones she started and the ones started by others.

I don't really buy your theory of ECCIE policy being "hey, it's a thread, I'm a mod, I'll lock it if I wanna, no explanation required" In fact, I find it rather comical and amusing.

I find it functionally identical to the one you described above, especially if you're willing to accept one line non sequiturs as explanations. Comical, though, yeah.

To illustrate that, point out any thread you find that has been locked with no explanation given and I'll gladly reopen it immediately. I'll assume that it had been locked by accident and if it's something that needs to be relocked, it will be-this time with the proper explanation.

St. C

Why is the Marley thread closed? Because she is banned. That's not an explanation unless you have a policy that, for example, threads about banned members are to be locked, which you specifically disavow having above.

[administrator]

Well if you don't like what I have to say I suggest you take it up with the owner of this board.

All kidding aside my friend, it's obvious that this isn't about threads that have been locked with no explanation whatsoever...which is what I assumed you meant.

Your point was that you don't like the explanations given. Understood.

In a perfect world, everyone would understand, accept, and agree with every decision we make around here, but we all know this isn't a perfect world and some folks will disagree.

No need to fret 78704,...see if you can shake it off. There's bound to be something around here that you can enjoy. That's the intent anyway. Sorry I couldn't satisfy you on that one, but I'll keep on trying to make this a better place for you to spend your time. You just keep letting me know when I don't live up to your expectations and Ill take those words to heart......seriously.

St. C