Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: Thread Locking System...
  • Subject: Thread Locking System...
Subject: Thread Locking System...
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

http://www.bungie.net/Forums/posts.aspx?postID=9880519
----
I do realize that such a thread is pretty much flame bait. But how come it is that the thread has to suffer the blow for the one person initiating the thread? Aren't there any other alternetive solutions to resolve such issues?

  • 01.29.2007 11:52 PM PDT

Official Town Drunk of Sandwichia. Nation of the Flood.
MBT - Impossible Just Happened
* How is it that "Fat Chance" and "Slim Chance" mean the same thing?
* If you choke a Smurf, what color will it turn?

XBOX User Space profile

Other then the fact that t is a stupid thread, it doesn't

  • 01.30.2007 12:00 AM PDT

2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

The mods tend to try and stop flame wars before they break out. They also, from what I have seen, prefer to try and save people from getting blacklisted by locking the thread.

But like you said, that thread is pretty much flame bait.

  • 01.30.2007 12:00 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

It wasn't exactly the best of examples, but it was one of the quickest.
----
On some of my threads, I've seen thread sabatoge attempts, in hopes they'll cause it to get locked.

[Edited on 1/30/2007]

  • 01.30.2007 12:02 AM PDT

2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

What is another example? Mods usually have a reason behind locking or deleting threads. If the reason hasn't happened yet, it might / will.

[Edited on 1/30/2007]

  • 01.30.2007 12:03 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

http://www.bungie.net/Forums/posts.aspx?postID=9879514&po stRepeater1-p=2
Xspartan99X giving a shot to get the thread locked. It wasn't locked, but I could sense verge of locking. I suppose it would require better vigiliance(self-policing) of the thread starter, and possibly others.

  • 01.30.2007 12:07 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

You must remember that making a thread doesn't make it "your thread". You can't tell people to "get out of your thread", because you don't own the thread. As such, the conduct of the people posting in your thread is just as important as the conduct of you yourself, the thread creator.

If someone else bumps your thread lots, it still counts.
-TGP-

  • 01.30.2007 12:07 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Great_Pretender
You must remember that making a thread doesn't make it "your thread". You can't tell people to "get out of your thread", because you don't own the thread. As such, the conduct of the people posting in your thread is just as important as the conduct of you yourself, the thread creator.

If someone else bumps your thread lots, it still counts.
-TGP-
Understood, it is a shared thing as well. And the fact it only takes one or two to take down the fleet. It's rather "idiotic" that specific threads can't be ran simply because there has to be zealous flame wars, specifically "cheaters," threads

[Edited on 1/30/2007]

  • 01.30.2007 12:09 AM PDT

2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

What -TGP- said... basically he is starting things.. so thread locked. Potential controversy. Thread locked to prevent such things from happening, I think.

  • 01.30.2007 12:09 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

What about a system, that players can be banned by specific threads, but not actually by the forums as a whole?

  • 01.30.2007 12:12 AM PDT

2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Too complicated and too messy IMO. Most threads don't last that long, anyway. If someone screws up enough to be banned from a thread, he might as well be banned from the forum as well.

  • 01.30.2007 12:13 AM PDT

No signature found. Click here to change this.

Posted by: Great_Pretender
You can't tell people to "get out of your thread", because you don't own the thread.


GTFO This Internets.

  • 01.30.2007 12:15 AM PDT

2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Posted by: Mattbluhalofan
Posted by: Great_Pretender
You can't tell people to "get out of your thread", because you don't own the thread.


GTFO This Internets.

This isn't your thread >:)

  • 01.30.2007 12:15 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Code Zero
Too complicated and too messy IMO. Most threads don't last that long, anyway. If someone screws up enough to be banned from a thread, he might as well be banned from the forum as well.
Well if the intenstions of the moderation is to avoid blacklisting as much as possible, then wouldn't it be something wanted? Threads could be ran by thread starter, deleting replies, and banning other people, however no locking. And it would be in the Forum Guidelines to not abuse Thread hosting powers. And moderators would see the unchanged version of the thread. Seems far fetched, but imagination is invention!
----
I guess the more you talk about it, the more hopeless it seems.

[Edited on 1/30/2007]

  • 01.30.2007 12:17 AM PDT

2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Posted by: AnalyticalEdify
Posted by: Code Zero
Too complicated and too messy IMO. Most threads don't last that long, anyway. If someone screws up enough to be banned from a thread, he might as well be banned from the forum as well.
Well if the intenstions of the moderation is to avoid blacklisting as much as possible, then wouldn't it be something wanted? Threads could be ran by thread starter, deleting replies, and banning other people, however no locking. And it would be in the Forum Guidelines to not abuse Thread hosting powers. And moderators would see the unchanged version of the thread. Seems far fetched, but imagination is invention!

I'm not sure if that is the intention, I'm just assuming from some things I've seen. And giving the topic creator those powers is too crazy. Things will definitely get out of hand. They can edit other people's posts to make them say absurd things which can lead to other things (flaming, blackmail, etc.). Two people can pair up to troll, like having one person start the thread, have the second person insult someone or post something against the rules and then have the topic creator delete his partners post before a mod sees it.

Too much potential danger and too messy...

I guess the more you talk about it, the more hopeless it seems.
Pretty much...

[Edited on 1/30/2007]

  • 01.30.2007 12:21 AM PDT

I remember when I used this space to put cool looking links to my chapters back in the day. I don't even know why I'm using it now. Why are you even reading this? You must be interested in me. Still reading?

Thsi will also be locked in a matter of minutes at most an hour.

  • 01.30.2007 4:38 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: AnalyticalEdify
Posted by: Code Zero
Too complicated and too messy IMO. Most threads don't last that long, anyway. If someone screws up enough to be banned from a thread, he might as well be banned from the forum as well.
Well if the intenstions of the moderation is to avoid blacklisting as much as possible, then wouldn't it be something wanted? Threads could be ran by thread starter, deleting replies, and banning other people, however no locking. And it would be in the Forum Guidelines to not abuse Thread hosting powers. And moderators would see the unchanged version of the thread. Seems far fetched, but imagination is invention!
----
I guess the more you talk about it, the more hopeless it seems.

*disagrees with OP*
*Gets removed from thread.*

Such a system would completely ruin the purpose of a forum.

  • 01.30.2007 5:34 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: American Recoil
Thsi will also be locked in a matter of minutes at most an hour.
Another example of that one person on the verge of or causing a thread to be locked.

  • 01.30.2007 8:57 AM PDT

Strange evolution how people have come to believe
That we are it's greatest achievement
We're barely, we're just a collection of cells
Overrating themselves

The mods do a decent job of detecting when people are just trying to get a thread locked. If a user is posting in such a manner that he alone creates havoc within a thread, the user is usually blacklisted. If the topic itself lends itself to controversey, the mods will lock it. If the topic has been posted previously, it will get locked.

I saw nothing wrong with the thread in the OP's link getting locked. I wouldnt have locked it, but it looked like Yoozel just didnt feel like dealing with it.

Besides, what do you think this is, some kind of democracy or something?

  • 01.30.2007 9:49 AM PDT

@trueunderdog

Chapter

Narwhallace Smithington: Gone, but not forgotten. Never approve of anything lil guy. <3
Furious George: The new -blam!-

Posted by: Great_Pretender
If someone else bumps your thread lots, it still counts.
-TGP-


So say I started a thread and it had some decent discussion going and someone on the forums who doesn't like me decides to bump my thread repeatedly to get it locked, it gets locked? I wouldn't complain about it getting locked but shouldn't the person bumping get a punishment as well?

I used "I" in a very hypothetical sense because I rarely create threads.

  • 01.30.2007 10:30 AM PDT

2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Posted by: True Underdog
Posted by: Great_Pretender
If someone else bumps your thread lots, it still counts.
-TGP-


So say I started a thread and it had some decent discussion going and someone on the forums who doesn't like me decides to bump my thread repeatedly to get it locked, it gets locked? I wouldn't complain about it getting locked but shouldn't the person bumping get a punishment as well?

I used "I" in a very hypothetical sense because I rarely create threads.

I'm sure bumping repeatedly might count as spam.

  • 01.30.2007 10:39 AM PDT