Locked threads

[stamper]

It has annoyed me for some time that the forum allows posters to lock or delete topics that they have started. I can understand this if it goes off topic or gets offensive. However that isn't the case all of the time. In this instance a lot of posters took time to answer the question posed and the latter post was the thanks the posters got for their efforts.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=57889.20

I think that the moderator should disable this function.

[michael]

If you like, start a new thread and refer back to the old one.

I think that allowing someone who starts a thread to decided when its run its course is appropriate.

Michael

[ckimmerle]

I think that allowing someone who starts a thread to decide when its run its course is appropriate.

I disagree. The person who starts a new topic is not the only stakeholder in the conversation.

[stamper]

This was my thoughts as well. If you look at the original thread the poster ended the thread on a surly and rude note without anyone being able to reply. As stated the thread was amicable and hadn't reached a natural end. Starting a new thread and linking back looks like someone has a score to settle. However it is Michael's forum and he decides.

[Josh-H]

However it is Michael's forum and he decides.

Exactly. He is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. I see nothing broken here requiring an urgent fix. Move along.

[feppe]

[stamper]

Exactly. He is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. I see nothing broken here requiring an urgent fix. Move along.

Can you recommend a speed?  Merely exercising a point of view, which I am entitled to?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Time to lock this thread? 

[JohnKoerner]

I disagree. The person who starts a new topic is not the only stakeholder in the conversation.

I agree with Michael on this one. If a person starts a specific thread, say for help, he may not like (or appreciate) some of the snide remarks certain individuals may make. The way some people offer their "help" is really nothing but derision (or carries a condescending tone to it) ... so, if one particular individual on that thread answers the OP's question to his satisfaction, then the OP may see fit to put an end to what he perceives as an ifinite digression of crappola on "his" thread that he feels is unwelcome.

So while it may be true that the OP is not the only "stakeholder" in the conversation, the flipside to that is no one is forcing anyone else to take the time to respond either, and so for those who do respond maybe it would behoove them (and everyone else) to do so with respect.

Personally, I think it would be great if the originator of the thread also could delete individual comments that he doesn't like on his thread, comments which he feels is taking the discussion in a direction he does not wish to go.

Jack


.

[stamper]

Quote

Personally, I think it would be great if the originator of the thread also could delete individual comments that he doesn't like on his thread, comments which he feels is taking the discussion in a direction he does not wish to go.

Unquote

You are obviously not serious? You wouldn't have any postings. Seriously, this issue is a double edged sword which I accept and there isn't a right or wrong answer. I feel that the moderator should call time on a thread. That is why he has that post?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... If a person starts a specific thread, say for help, he may not like (or appreciate) some of the snide remarks certain individuals may make. The way some people offer their "help" is really nothing but derision (or carries a condescending tone to it) ... so, if one particular individual on that thread answers the OP's question to his satisfaction, then the OP may see fit to put an end to what he perceives as an ifinite digression of crappola on "his" thread that he feels is unwelcome... I think it would be great if the originator of the thread also could delete individual comments that he doesn't like on his thread, comments which he feels is taking the discussion in a direction he does not wish to go.

The moment this forum is sanitized from all those "snide, derisive, condescending", out-of-the-left-field, quirky, etc. digressions... is the moment I will stop participating in it. I've had enough dry, rational, boring, PhD thesis-like discussions in my life to come here for another portion of the same.

This forum is a community, not a red-light district. You do not come to satisfy yourself, wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am style, get what you've come here for, turn around and leave, without a good-bye or thank-you. At least in the red-light district you would pay for that "pleasure".

If you do come here with that "I got what I needed, screw you" attitude, rest assured that sooner or later there will be someone who will introduce you to the basic Newtonian laws of physics, namely action-reaction, and respond in kind, with with all those "snide, derisive, condescending" remarks. I will be the first one to volunteer.

[JohnKoerner]

You are obviously not serious? You wouldn't have any postings.

Correction: wankers like you wouldn't be on my threads

In fact, let's take you for example: the truth is I have got plenty of feedback from better photographers than you on my threads, which proves my point: cull the unwanted from your discussions while responding and appreciating only those who are helpful to you

I believe each person should have the same right to converse only with the people he wants to "on a thread" ... same as he would choose only to converse with the people he wants to personally.

Seriously, this issue is a double edged sword which I accept and there isn't a right or wrong answer. I feel that the moderator should call time on a thread. That is why he has that post?

I was being serious. Don't you wish you could do that now?

Cheers

Jack



.

[JohnKoerner]

The moment this forum is sanitized from all those "snide, derisive, condescending", out-of-the-left-field, quirky, etc. digressions... is the moment I will stop participating in it. I've had enough dry, rational, boring, PhD thesis-like discussions in my life to come here for another portion of the same.

LOL, don't take what I say too seriously, Slobodan.

In case you haven't noticed, I have quite a bit of fun "digressing" with snide remarks also

The truth is, sometimes it can be fun to do, while other times it is an annoyance (again, same as with real life). And, as with real life, it should be any man's call when he's had enough and to terminate the discussion with certain individuals.

This forum is a community, not a red-light district. You do not come to satisfy yourself, wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am style, get what you've come here for, turn around and leave, without a good-bye or thank-you. At least in the red-light district you would pay for that "pleasure".
If you do come here with that "I got what I needed, screw you" attitude, rest assured that sooner or later there will be someone who will introduce you to the basic Newtonian laws of physics, namely action-reaction, and respond in kind, with with all those "snide, derisive, condescending" remarks. I will be the first one to volunteer.

LOL, again, you can't be talking about me bud, as I digress and engage as much as anyone.

But I honestly don't see why a person should be "forced" to digress or field a lot of bullship either. If a man wants to ask a question, and doesn't want to hear a lot of lip or sarcasm, why should he be "forced" to do so?

Why can't he simply ask his question, delete any wise-ass comments (if they pop up), and then only allow and address the people who earnestly try to help him? That doesn't make the man "thankless"; he might in fact be very thankful to those who are actually trying sincerely to help him.

Jack


.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... But I honestly don't see why a person should be "forced" to digress or field a lot of bullship either. If a man wants to ask a question, and doesn't want to hear a lot of lip or sarcasm, why should he be "forced" to do so?

Why can't he simply ask his question, delete any wise-ass comments (if they pop up), and then only allow and address the people who earnestly try to help him?...

Because community, like a relationship, is not a one-way street. It is a give-and-take. You can't just come here to take only, and cherry-pick as you do it. Things come in a package usually... good with bad... smart and silly. As Marilyn Monroe said "...if you can't handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don't deserve me at my best.”

And by the way, if you are really smart, you'll find nuggets of wisdom in the most snide of comments.

P.S. I usually use "you" in a rhetorical sense, not necessarily you specifically

[ckimmerle]

[...cull the unwanted from your discussions while responding and appreciating only those who are helpful to you.

And there is where the problem lies. As forum sites are, for lack of a better word, public spaces, there are a lot of lurkers and members who peruse many of the new threads. As any topic is going to be interesting and relevant to at least a few other people than the OP, allowing an OP to selfishly lock or edit a thread denies those people information from which they may benefit.

Sure, as had been argued, another thread can be started, but that will only duplicate and replicate the thread that was locked, pushing the so-called offensive and unhelpful information somewhere else. So where is the benefit, other than to a single individual?

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Better than letting the OP terminate a thread, I would like to see an "ignore this poster" button like the one the previous forum software had. I used it a couple of times when one forum member or another was getting on my nerves too much. My choosing to "ignore" someone had no effect on any other forum member, and I cound "un-ignore" at any time, or view individual posts If I wanted.

I liked that system.

Eric

[RSL]

The moment this forum is sanitized from all those "snide, derisive, condescending", out-of-the-left-field, quirky, etc. digressions... is the moment I will stop participating in it. I've had enough dry, rational, boring, PhD thesis-like discussions in my life to come here for another portion of the same.

This forum is a community, not a red-light district. You do not come to satisfy yourself, wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am style, get what you've come here for, turn around and leave, without a good-bye or thank-you. At least in the red-light district you would pay for that "pleasure".

If you do come here with that "I got what I needed, screw you" attitude, rest assured that sooner or later there will be someone who will introduce you to the basic Newtonian laws of physics, namely action-reaction, and respond in kind, with with all those "snide, derisive, condescending" remarks. I will be the first one to volunteer.

Hear, hear! Slobodan. The minute we have to start beating around the bush is the point at which the forum dies.

[JohnKoerner]

Because community, like a relationship, is not a one-way street. It is a give-and-take. You can't just come here to take only, and cherry-pick as you do it. Things come in a package usually... good with bad... smart and silly. As Marilyn Monroe said "...if you can't handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don't deserve me at my best.”

Even within a community, there still remain those people you choose not to deal with.

Just think about it, do you let everyone within your area into your home? Do you enjoy the input of everyone in your community to your personal questions? (I didn't think so.)

The truth is, even within a community, certain restrictions apply

And by the way, if you are really smart, you'll find nuggets of wisdom in the most snide of comments.
P.S. I usually use "you" in a rhetorical sense, not necessarily you specifically

PS: Even you have to realize that not every snide remark carries wisdom ... and I use "you" rhetorically also

Jack


.

[JohnKoerner]

And there is where the problem lies. As forum sites are, for lack of a better word, public spaces, there are a lot of lurkers and members who peruse many of the new threads. As any topic is going to be interesting and relevant to at least a few other people than the OP, allowing an OP to selfishly lock or edit a thread denies those people information from which they may benefit.
Sure, as had been argued, another thread can be started, but that will only duplicate and replicate the thread that was locked, pushing the so-called offensive and unhelpful information somewhere else. So where is the benefit, other than to a single individual?

Which is wherein the benefit of being able to selectively delete "posts" would be even more helpful, actually, than having to lock-up an entire thread.

Suppose 15 people were contributing positively to one of your threads. Suppose further that 2 people were being wise-asses on that same thread and kinda ruining the climate. If (as things are now) you "locked" the entire thread, you thereby ruin the exchange between yourself and the 15 contributing members. However, if (as I have suggested) you had the power, as the originator of the thread, to merely delete the wise-ass posts from the 2 jerks, then you could rid yourself of the unwanted chaff ... while still keeping things going between yourself and the other members who are contributing in earnest (as well as provide more interesting material for the silent lurkers).

Jack


.

[JohnKoerner]

Hear, hear! Slobodan. The minute we have to start beating around the bush is the point at which the forum dies.

No one suggested beating around the bush.

What is being suggested is that it really is possible for a person to directly answer a question, with all sincerity, without a offering single snide or disparaging remark ... and ... that it should also be possible for a person to be able to cull any snide remarks from his own thread, if he doesn't want them around.


Jack


.