I sort of agree with Hanamichi. I see a lot of good threads being closed because the mod/admin thought it might lead to a flame war. In fact, I've seen some good discussions which were forced to stop due to one tiny remark by some idiot. Preventative measures are one thing, but simply assuming a thread is going to go out of hand is premature and unwarranted. I think threads should only be closed when necessary, when all attempts to get the thread under control have failed.
Hello, moderators?
First of all, my apologies for bringing this up again.
What gives you the right to close a thread which failed to be generally offensive or challenge the rules? The first thread aside, which BTW had flames starting from a moderator himself, I could see no reason why the other two were closed. Non-constructive? This isnt the Constructive-discussion sub-forum. There is a difference between pointless discussion and spam. Also closing a thread just because of anticipated conflict is pretty forceful, it was apparant to me that several other members did have legitimate things to say about the past and present. I would think it is only fair that you guys warn about impending flaming and closing it only if it gets out of hand - you dont amputate your hand when you contract rashes on your skin, you could clearly benefit from keeping it (extreme example I know
).
If it has come to a point where every thread in Emuforums has to have a legimate point and reason to exist, it is Emuforums who has changed. The closed threads were a direct highlight of the dicussions that took place before the first was closed. I guess years ago the Batard Vs. Maggots campaign should not have existed?
The point of this thread (as, for now, one seems necessary) is to provide contents for a complaint regarding the pattern of the moderation of the forums.
Sidenote: I did notice Reichfuher's apology regarding the aggressiveness. The above is merely what I intend to point out. I do however think that if Cloudvii's idioms innocently offend you, you only need to do nothing or inform him about it - there is no need to offend.
What gives you the right to close a thread which failed to be generally offensive or challenge the rules? The first thread aside, which BTW had flames starting from a moderator himself, I could see no reason why the other two were closed. Non-constructive? This isnt the Constructive-discussion sub-forum. There is a difference between pointless discussion and spam. Also closing a thread just because of anticipated conflict is pretty forceful, it was apparant to me that several other members did have legitimate things to say about the past and present. I would think it is only fair that you guys warn about impending flaming and closing it only if it gets out of hand - you dont amputate your hand when you contract rashes on your skin, you could clearly benefit from keeping it (extreme example I know
).If it has come to a point where every thread in Emuforums has to have a legimate point and reason to exist, it is Emuforums who has changed. The closed threads were a direct highlight of the dicussions that took place before the first was closed. I guess years ago the Batard Vs. Maggots campaign should not have existed?
The point of this thread (as, for now, one seems necessary) is to provide contents for a complaint regarding the pattern of the moderation of the forums.
Sidenote: I did notice Reichfuher's apology regarding the aggressiveness. The above is merely what I intend to point out. I do however think that if Cloudvii's idioms innocently offend you, you only need to do nothing or inform him about it - there is no need to offend.
- Status
1 - 1 of 6 Posts
1 - 1 of 6 Posts
- Status
