Closing threads

[Red1966]

I am finding that, quite often, when I return to RIU after a day or two of being away, threads I had participated in previously have been closed. This seems to be limited to the more "spirited" debates. I wonder if what amounts to censorship is an acceptable price to pay for "preventing discord" (assuming that is the reason). Some of the threads closed didn't really seem all that "discordant" to me to warrant shutting down. Am I the only one thinking moderators are becoming too quick to close threads?

 

[cannabineer]

Would you rather they be deleted? When a thread decays to simple mudslinging, insult and this annoying talk of snitchery, can you recommend a better way of applying the brakes? Imo it isn't censorship so much as puppy, meet newspaper. cn

 

[Red1966]

I would say it more resembles taping the mouth shut on every dog in the neighborhood because your dog barks too much/ loud/ late at night. Yes, some posters are offensive and really have little of merit to add, but even in that climate people can add value to the conversation. Would it not make more sense to remove the troublesome posters for some defined period of time rather than punish the whole community? Shutting down the thread seems to avoid the moderators having to make a values judgement on the merits of a post(s) but is akin to punishing the group for the transgressions of the individual. I understand that I may be asking too much of the moderators. Perhaps we need to have a conversation on weather "brakes" are really preferable to free speech.

 

[UncleBuck]

I would say it more resembles taping the mouth shut on every dog in the neighborhood because your dog barks too much/ loud/ late at night. Yes, some posters are offensive and really have little of merit to add, but even in that climate people can add value to the conversation. Would it not make more sense to remove the troublesome posters for some defined period of time rather than punish the whole community? Shutting down the thread seems to avoid the moderators having to make a values judgement on the merits of a post(s) but is akin to punishing the group for the transgressions of the individual. I understand that I may be asking too much of the moderators. Perhaps we need to have a conversation on weather "brakes" are really preferable to free speech.

*whether

....

 

[dannyboy602]

I am finding that, quite often, when I return to RIU after a day or two of being away, threads I had participated in previously have been closed. This seems to be limited to the more "spirited" debates. I wonder if what amounts to censorship is an acceptable price to pay for "preventing discord" (assuming that is the reason). Some of the threads closed didn't really seem all that "discordant" to me to warrant shutting down. Am I the only one thinking moderators are becoming too quick to close threads?

No you're not the only one. I think it too.

 

[abandonconflict]

*whether

....

You forgot to call him a holocaust denier and trumpet Israel's right to defend apartheid theocracy.

 

[lifegoesonbrah]

I don't really have a problem with some saying something 'offensive', as I am an adult and it won't ruin my day. What I do have a problem with, however, is threads being hijacked from reasonable discussion to nonsense spam bickering. It can be funny, but when it results in several pages of nonsense, the thread has basically been ruined. Sometimes Canna will lock a thread, then unlock it a while later to slow down the spamming, which I agree with. It is disheartening to have a discussion permanently locked, though.

Just my 2 cents (adjusted for inflation)

 

[UncleBuck]

You forgot to call him a holocaust denier and trumpet Israel's right to defend apartheid theocracy.

witness the devolution begin.

red is not a holocaust denier. he's not even an anti-semite. please don't lump him in with the legitimate holocaust deniers and anti-semites that have recently decided that stoners need to hear about how the holocaust was a joke and wake up to the fact that my wife's family is part of some nefarious global kabal wherein they control the banks, media, and whatever other evil they want to blame for their own miserable lots in life.

 

[lifegoesonbrah]

I have a feeling this thread will be closed

 

[Red1966]

witness the devolution begin. red is not a holocaust denier. he's not even an anti-semite. please don't lump him in with the legitimate holocaust deniers and anti-semites that have recently decided that stoners need to hear about how the holocaust was a joke and wake up to the fact that my wife's family is part of some nefarious global kabal wherein they control the banks, media, and whatever other evil they want to blame for their own miserable lots in life.

Who are you and what have you done with Buck?

 

[cannabineer]

I would say it more resembles taping the mouth shut on every dog in the neighborhood because your dog barks too much/ loud/ late at night. Yes, some posters are offensive and really have little of merit to add, but even in that climate people can add value to the conversation. Would it not make more sense to remove the troublesome posters for some defined period of time rather than punish the whole community? Shutting down the thread seems to avoid the moderators having to make a values judgement on the merits of a post(s) but is akin to punishing the group for the transgressions of the individual. I understand that I may be asking too much of the moderators. Perhaps we need to have a conversation on weather "brakes" are really preferable to free speech.

Since this is a private website, and since i have been asked to apply my judgment to bringing a small amount of restraint when things get out of hand imo, free speech becomes a subjective thing. And since I don't and won't have a dog, your sly accusation of hypocrisy is without traction. i find closing a thread where the usual suspects have abandoned even a minimal measure of civility to be a mild way of reminding them that this is not after all a no-holds-barred environment. It does impress me that you don't agree, and I will always listen on the basis that you can convince me. But I will ask for a more reasoned complaint in order to move me to change my criteria. cn

 

[Red1966]

I made no accusation of hypocrisy. I fear you may encourage the "uncivil" by giving them the power to silence debate by merely being obnoxious. Wouldn't it be more effective to aim at the transgressors instead of the whole group?

 

[Kite High]

Would you rather they be deleted? When a thread decays to simple mudslinging, insult and this annoying talk of snitchery, can you recommend a better way of applying the brakes? Imo it isn't censorship so much as puppy, meet newspaper. cn

yes deletion would be much better....oh but wait...nothing gets deleted in this forum databank ever in actuality...only ghosted here...IOW hidden from all but the privileged

 

[sunni]

chances are because youve been away for the many days you dont see the 100's of posts we deleted in youre jovial spirited threads, after we delete so many posts, we just decide to close.
Members cannot see deleted posts, so thats most likely why you think the thread is okay but in reality we deleted so much of the content and it just kept going on and on and on like politics does its easier for us to close the discussion

Again ill take this time to remind you that when you clicked "agree" to this site
you allowed us to remove, edit, or delete whatever we choose as mods, admins, ect thanks

 

[cannabineer]

I made no accusation of hypocrisy. I fear you may encourage the "uncivil" by giving them the power to silence debate by merely being obnoxious. Wouldn't it be more effective to aim at the transgressors instead of the whole group?

Nine times out of ten, that is what I do. I don't often or reflexively close threads. Where I can perform a simple clean-up, I delete posts and leave the thread open. Where we disagree, and where i am keenly interested to know if your and my divergent positions have merit, is whether this encourages or discourages the uncivil ones. Your idea is new to me, and you've provoked me to think.

yes deletion would be much better....oh but wait...nothing gets deleted in this forum databank ever in actuality...only ghosted here...IOW hidden from all but the privileged

A closure leaves it available to all. I dislike thread deletions for just that reason. It has much less teaching value to those without the higher-tier view privileges.

I have a feeling this thread will be closed

I hope not. This promises to be a very useful thread to me specifically in learning more as my role as this section's junior mod. I will of course delete egregious trollery and misbehavior on a post-by-post basis, but I will deliberately be, uhm, liberal in that interpretation and implementation. cn

 

[stoned cockatoo]

impeach pot roast 2013.

I will put up my hand to run the site

 

[potpimp]

I am finding that, quite often, when I return to RIU after a day or two of being away, threads I had participated in previously have been closed. This seems to be limited to the more "spirited" debates. I wonder if what amounts to censorship is an acceptable price to pay for "preventing discord" (assuming that is the reason). Some of the threads closed didn't really seem all that "discordant" to me to warrant shutting down. Am I the only one thinking moderators are becoming too quick to close threads?

Based on our past interactions, I believe you have serious issues with authority Red, this just being one manifestation of that.

 

[Red1966]

I think you're reading too much into this. I doubt I have anymore issues with authority than anyone else. I just have become disappointed to return to a debate to only to find it closed. I admit to being unaware that the worst posts were being deleted. I would suggest that, after a poster must be deleted several times, he/she be suspended from posting for a day or more. Closing the debate entirely seems to be punishing all for the sins of the few. I really can't blame the moderators, they are performing a service for no reward. I can't see any bias or favoritism in their actions. I just think they could be more effective shooting the ringleaders instead of the whole mob. It may very well be that closing the thread is warranted in some cases. I guess that someone is always going to disagree when you act on what is basically a judgement call.

 

[cannabineer]

I think you're reading too much into this. I doubt I have anymore issues with authority than anyone else. I just have become disappointed to return to a debate to only to find it closed. I admit to being unaware that the worst posts were being deleted. I would suggest that, after a poster must be deleted several times, he/she be suspended from posting for a day or more. Closing the debate entirely seems to be punishing all for the sins of the few. I really can't blame the moderators, they are performing a service for no reward. I can't see any bias or favoritism in their actions. I just think they could be more effective shooting the ringleaders instead of the whole mob. It may very well be that closing the thread is warranted in some cases. I guess that someone is always going to disagree when you act on what is basically a judgement call.

Suspending a member is a privilege reserved for folks much higher than this humble broom&dustpan operator. cn

 

[sunni]

I think you're reading too much into this. I doubt I have anymore issues with authority than anyone else. I just have become disappointed to return to a debate to only to find it closed. I admit to being unaware that the worst posts were being deleted. I would suggest that, after a poster must be deleted several times, he/she be suspended from posting for a day or more. Closing the debate entirely seems to be punishing all for the sins of the few. I really can't blame the moderators, they are performing a service for no reward. I can't see any bias or favoritism in their actions. I just think they could be more effective shooting the ringleaders instead of the whole mob. It may very well be that closing the thread is warranted in some cases. I guess that someone is always going to disagree when you act on what is basically a judgement call.

We cant just suspended someone from a thread for the day thats not how it works.
Also PR (the head hauncho) does not want us banning members without speaking to him first, and also mods like canna and other politic mods, do not have powers beyond their means they can only delete threads, close threads ,delete posts, in their area, they CANNOT ban, or suspend anyone
there are only 5 of us who can ban members, or are "global" moderators meaning we have access to the whole board.
I think a lot of the miscommunication comes from what the users do not understand about the mods abilities.

I would suggest you find another forum to speak about politics with, this one here is filled with just people bitching at each other on a daily basis. thats all, someone will make a subject thread, maybe 1 page will be about it , than a few members here will post and it turns into a
"he is a snitch"
"he is a jew hater"
"he is a perv"
ect ect for about 42 pages before we the mods just get fed up with their bullshit and delete their HIGHLY inappropriate posts, it always ends out the same in politics 5-10 people literally just arguing about nonsense that has nothing to do with the title subject. We put up and let a lot of shit fly here but we have other things that need to be done on the entire site.

I think you should take into account there are more thread closures in politics than there are in the ENTIRE website as a whole because of a select group of people who cant just shut up bite their tongues or use the goddamn ignore button feature
and Red i must say and I will be so bold to go there, you are and have been one of those people