View Full Version : posting on locked threads
So the other benefit of being an admin is that you can post on locked threads.
Can I please make a complaint/suggestion
If you are going to close a thread after only one reply as been made, can staff please not reply to the locked threads. It is just sort of annoying when the staff closes a thread preventing members from putting forth their point of view, but continue to share theirs.
It is not you AJ, but it is something I see lots of staff, not just on this site, doing, and it will make members upset.
Protogod
03-17-2008, 8:22 PM
Generally speaking, when a staff does this, it's because its the -RIGHT- opinion, for lack of a better word.
Moreover, if a thread is closed after only one reply, there was not going to be any valuable opinions presented anyway.
It's like saying "staff shouldnt delete threads because other people cant see them." It's kinda the point.
Off topic: By the way- redirect of irony. (http://www.warboards.org/showthread.php?t=34181)
Vhaeraun
03-17-2008, 8:26 PM
fred, when you can design a forum software that can rival the three big names that I know of - vBulletin, Invision, and phpBB - you can decide the posting rights of admins.
Till then, it really doesn't affect you.
Modred
03-17-2008, 9:23 PM
It's rather rare, but I have seen threads where around five or six mods all post after it's closed. In such cases, a few add "Here's why you were wrong" comments, but most just post clever images or snappy comebacks. As I said, this is rare; in fact, I've only seen it once. But it has happened.
Protogod
03-17-2008, 9:34 PM
It's rather rare
and more importantly, funny
it's not something we do often, and you'll have to forgive some of us as well, there are a few times where I'll reply and not realize it was closed until after the reply is up -- though this might be because someone's closed while I was posting, heh.
I'll also post in a locked thread as a way to offer up some more info or something.
-Neo
Black.Ice
03-18-2008, 1:11 PM
I post in locked threads regularly to flaunt my power.
Go me.
Heck, who even cares? :P I sure don't. But then again I've never had my threads closed before for lack of substance... :angel:
Anoiktos
03-18-2008, 7:22 PM
Generally speaking, when a staff does this, it's because its the -RIGHT- opinion, for lack of a better word.
I find this comment arrogant to the point of being incredibly offensive. What right does a moderator have to, on an open forum, declare that theirs is the only 'correct' point of view, and restrict the debate so that others cannot be furthered?
I believe that 'Correct' is only correct until refutation; refutation is forthcoming even on issues where previous judgment was impeccable due to the application of new evidence. I believe this not without precedent: the Scientific Method employs much the same argument towards hypotheses and proven theories with regards to new evidence.
In cases where the content is harmful or inappropriate, yes - I believe that it is the moderator's responsibility to use their best judgment in the deletion, modification, or closure of the thread so as to curtail further damage. Said moderator(s) should not then abuse their power by continuing the propagation of the harmful material beyond making a polite and to-the-point ending statement, preferably including reference (linky) to their authority. (i.e. the rule they're calling upon to close the thread.)
That way tyranny lies:
"Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." - Aristotle
And without free exchange of opinions, I hypothesize that a correct opinion, one that withstands scrutiny, cynicism, and multiple points of view, cannot be met except by happy accident.
I find this comment arrogant to the point of being incredibly offensive. What right does a moderator have to, on an open forum, declare that theirs is the only 'correct' point of view, and restrict the debate so that others cannot be furthered?
I believe that 'Correct' is only correct until refutation; refutation is forthcoming even on issues where previous judgment was impeccable due to the application of new evidence. I believe this not without precedent: the Scientific Method employs much the same argument towards hypotheses and proven theories with regards to new evidence.
In cases where the content is harmful or inappropriate, yes - I believe that it is the moderator's responsibility to use their best judgment in the deletion, modification, or closure of the thread so as to curtail further damage. Said moderator(s) should not then abuse their power by continuing the propagation of the harmful material beyond making a polite and to-the-point ending statement, preferably including reference (linky) to their authority. (i.e. the rule they're calling upon to close the thread.)
That way tyranny lies:
"Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." - Aristotle
And without free exchange of opinions, I hypothesize that a correct opinion, one that withstands scrutiny, cynicism, and multiple points of view, cannot be met except by happy accident.
The main point is that we were given the role to be moderators due to certain qualities that we have, no matter what our obviously divergent personalities are and one of those is that we don't abuse our position and have the common sense to see what can float a boat and what would've instantly sunk it. The most important part of being in the staff is that we can (in my case could) serve as a positive role model without questioning.
Then, I guess that when you see a deleted post/thread you can guess that it has flunked. When you don't agree with it you can always PM a staff member (http://www.warboards.org/showgroups.php?) and present your well exposed ground arguments to reopen it or undelete that post/thread. Rare were the occasions that I saw a thread being reopened due to such justifications being presented.
And I must say that long before I even dreamt being staff I asked for an IR thread to be reopened to make a nice presentation versus a few PoV's that I felt that needed further refutation and that it was granted to me since the staff member in question saw that my basis justification items were valid.
The decision to post in a locked thread is generally left up to each staff member. However most of the time, if the thread is of the more humorous variety (ie: that fork thread) then most, if not all staff, will pop in at one point or another.
Most other times though posting in a locked thread is basically the result of the following reasons:
The staff member in question wishes to expand on any information or respond to something specific pertaining to the topic or thread (for instance, if someone in the Tech Annex requested that their thread about a computer issue be closed, normally I or another would accommodate them, and then I would post something relevant, eg: "If you have a similar problem you might visit <site> or do <the following>")
The staff member doesn't realize it's closed. For the staff, we still see the Quick Reply box on closed threads. For this reason some of us might post in a locked thread without realizing.
Or, the staff member just wishes to be a smart-ass. eg: Black.Ice. Pretty much all of us have done this at one point or another. Probably under the impression it's funny or humorous in some way.
And lastly, if the thread in question is locked, and you feel jilted because you didn't get a chance to respond then all you have to do is contact a staff member (someone who is currently active would be best) and simply ask that the thread be re-opened.
As for general moderation practices, there's a certain level of transparency and if you feel misused or feel that a staff member has acted inappropriately you can just as easily report their posts as you could anyone else's.
-Neo
wow, this is so much more than it needs to be.
MatGeo
03-19-2008, 5:29 AM
In layman terms, they post in locked threads because they feel like it.
I post in locked threads regularly to flaunt my power.
Go me.
Probably the best answer so far.
Vhaeraun
03-19-2008, 1:59 PM
Don't inflate BI's ego anymore than it already is. He already spends more time gloating than having making hawt man-love with me and others.
*Meh* Good point, Neo. Since when was staff I acted on my best stances possible (as most of you did too n' still do) I just forgot all about the reporting the staff's posts. ;p
Now let's please show the staff some love and start reporting the posts of the ones that you like the most, shall we? And if you fall for this one, you're way lower on the IQ scale than I initially thought. :smirk:
OboeGuru
03-19-2008, 5:48 PM
Staff members being smart-asses? Noooooooooo, that's unimaginable! :smirk:
Black.Ice
03-19-2008, 6:16 PM
In layman terms, they post in locked threads because they feel like it.
Probably the best answer so far.
I'm just keeping it real.
FrankZ
03-22-2008, 9:42 PM
I think mods post on locked threads only if they feel that the last post is incomplete and would need a second opinion or backing (i.e., deeper or better explanation). Also, they'd post if ever they feel like commenting on the last post, or on whatever the mod who closed the thread said.
Off-topic:
IMO, that, Black.Ice. Sounds definitely koowl.
Keepin' it real.
First there was the Hulkmania and now there's the Mod'phobiamania. That's the way I see it anyway. :P
Simply put, if there's something left to say, a Mod will use his right to post in a locked thread to do it. Occasionally, mods will do it to be a smart-arse or one-up a person, but it's incredibly rare that that happen in a thread that's actually serious. Most of the time, if we make a snappy comment that's out of place, it's in one that doesn't actually matter, in the grand scheme of things.
However, we have the ability to post in a locked thread as a tool of moderation. I've used that tool a number of times, and it has been quite useful as a measure. As such, I don't think it's worth the deal that's being made about it.
Protogod
03-23-2008, 11:03 AM
Zomg ironic post.
kongurous
03-23-2008, 8:45 PM
ABUSE.
fucking caps lock
Black.Ice
03-23-2008, 10:00 PM
You guys should stop posting in locked threads. You're setting a bad example. Sheesh.
Protogod
03-24-2008, 11:01 AM
*Puts on wizard hat and robe*
Thedutchjelle
03-24-2008, 12:58 PM
sup guys?
kongurous
03-24-2008, 1:45 PM
sup guys?
Holy shit.
Protogod
03-25-2008, 12:16 AM
Zomg, he's a hacker. Ban him!
hello page2.
lies page 4.
-Neo
talk about using baby settings for your pages.
Black.Ice
03-25-2008, 4:27 PM
What a n00b.
Anyone wan to merge this with Fork?
GrassDragon
03-25-2008, 4:57 PM
SC staff can post in locked threads?
Not cool.
talk about using baby settings for your pages.
anything more is super slow.
-Neo
maybe your swaetpants have invaded your lackluster connection.
Black.Ice
03-25-2008, 10:46 PM
Or perhaps you're ghetto site has too many DNS issues and is to table and graphic intensive, it clogs up at takes forever to load on normal connections?
Oh wait, I think I forgot to add the sarcasm in there.
submit your own coded design, asshat.
Protogod
03-26-2008, 11:01 AM
SC staff can post in locked threads?
Not cool.
Actually no, they can't. :P
Black.Ice
03-26-2008, 12:18 PM
I would but you would never implement it siting technical issues and it would never meet your standards. :P
then exceed standards.
and i only cite technical issues when there's a technical issue.
dummy. :P
Black.Ice, we should totally setup a vb of our own to screw around with theme wise.
-Neo
Black.Ice
03-26-2008, 10:49 PM
Too much effort. AJ would reject it. He'd cite typos and nit-pick at details :P
aka BI doesn't know how to program it well enough. :P
(also new vB coming soon, so it'd be a waste)
Black.Ice
03-27-2008, 10:41 AM
I'm quite fond of phpBB3.
Black.Ice
03-27-2008, 12:35 PM
I knew you weren't. I was just stating a fact to my loverboy, Neo.
I'm quite fond of phpBB3.
Well i've got one setup currently, if you'd like to play around with it, i was gonna do something with it, but never got around to it... Just kind of annoying though taht things like "quick reply" aren't standard.
and yeah, i'd rather wait for the new vb before pulling out a test version to screw with.
-Neo
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.