Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: Should the mods be given the options to delete threads?
  • Subject: Should the mods be given the options to delete threads?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3
Subject: Should the mods be given the options to delete threads?

Ach! Was ist los?

It attained critical morass and collapsed, leaving naught but a thin scattering of stupid memes and dark energy behind.

  • 02.04.2007 7:29 AM PDT

blahoogana (bluh·hoo·gan·uh), noun - er, just call me Josh.

BP | B.me

Posted by: necare
Posted by: Achronos
Locked threads don't hurt anything - it occassionally looks kind of weird when there is a page of them, but who cares? Better than having the entire conversation wiped from existence (in most cases).


Are you serious?


Of course he's serious, he's Achronos.

  • 02.04.2007 9:14 AM PDT

Posted by: Achronos
Little to none. Our database servers use very little CPU. Well, except for the stats database. That's quite active. But the forum database isn't that intensive. It is just large (like 12 gigs now). Managing the simultaneous access when things are busy - that's the tricky part. When things go down due to load, that's usually what the problem is - not CPU, but running out of connections or some sort of resource deadlock.

Of course, that's moot. Locked threads don't hurt anything - it occassionally looks kind of weird when there is a page of them, but who cares? Better than having the entire conversation wiped from existence (in most cases).


Ahh, this will be nice to reference the next time a ninja deletes a thread because he said it was taking up too much space. Viva La MTR!!!!!!!!!!

*puts on black armband*

  • 02.04.2007 9:22 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Elder Mythic Member

anyone who's played more than you has no life

anyone who's played less than you is a noob

yay <3 me and logical agree for once! it is common sense though :-)

still waiting for a response...

  • 02.04.2007 9:50 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I like to Rollick

Well if that was your actually reason you should of used that in your original post. Seeing as a japanese potty training video isn't the same as vulgar pornographic material, It's not a reach to see him not banned. Mods usually delete repeat threads but since I don't see them there anymore a mod probably didn't see it.

A pm isn't necessary for a locked thread, mod's usually post in a thread and explain why it has been locked. And every member should be well versed in the rules of the site so it isn't necessary.

Wouldn't having to PM a person why their thread was deleted deter moderators from deleting threads?

The "I cannot be banned BYAAH" actually does provide my with comic relief which was evident when I laughed to myself as I read it. I heard you claim that locked threads "clog discussion". Can you prove that? Like I said before they are an eyesore but I have not seen a locked thread prohibit or hinder discussion.

I personally like those kind of threads not being deleted because they actually preserve history. So a person can see what they posted and when, if it got deleted then it's as if the person never posted. I guess that's what really bothers me when I thread I take part in gets deleted for no reason.

Posted by: Logical Thinking
The actual reason why I posted this is because someone posted the same japanese potty training video 3 times in the flood and he wasnt banned and the threads are still there. I've just seen so many pointless threads clogging discussions everywhere.

The idea to PM someone after a mod has locked their thread would also be a good idea in that they wouldnt make the "OMG WTF H4X LOCKED !!!!!!!!11111" threads. at.

Right now there is a thread in the flood called "I cannot be banned BYAAAH" now can anyone say why that needs to stay and couldnt be deleted?


[Edited on 2/4/2007]

  • 02.04.2007 9:53 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Elder Mythic Member

anyone who's played more than you has no life

anyone who's played less than you is a noob

Posted by: Sketto
Like I said before they are an eyesore but [b]I have not seen a locked thread prohibit or hinder discussion.


i forgot to mention locked threads don't run amok saying "im prohibiting discussion LoL!". They have this silent knack of doing it... must be magic.

I personally like those kind of threads not being deleted because they actually preserve history. So a person can see what they posted and when, if it got deleted then it's as if the person never posted. I guess that's what really bothers me when I thread I take part in gets deleted for no reason.


im not quite sure why people have an obsession with preserving everything that's written on the forums... if you really wanted to see everything why not have all locked threads automatically moved to a new section of the forum called "LoL BANT" and then everyone can bathe in their IQ sapping radiance.

  • 02.04.2007 9:58 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Elder Mythic Member

anyone who's played more than you has no life

anyone who's played less than you is a noob

Posted by: Recon Number 54
* Shows that a ninja is on duty and is working the forums.
* Allows members (new and old) to see what is acceptable and is not.
* Preserves evidence.

That last one is becoming increasingly important. Especially since the advent of the search feature. We are all responsible for what we say, write and do on this site. Removing parts of someone's posting history is to skew their legacy and (in some cases) remove the proof that their removal or discipline was justified.

Blacklisted members have their posts hidden from public view, but they are preserved and visible via a search. Removing the evidence of someone's spam-spree, o racial slurs, or threats, is a bad thing and could allow them to mount a successful appeal of their ban.

if you don't trust the moderators judgement, don't ask them to be moderators. simple as that.

PM those people. Try to help them. Be a good member, be a good neighbor, offer them some pointers and assistance in keeping the forums clean and easy to navigate.
you and i both know that this would not solve a thing.

Demonstrate (by your actions) how a good thread is made, or how to participate in a valid and worthwhile discussion. Show them, (by not posting any replies and even PM'ing a ninja) that soon-to-be-locked threads do not get any traffic from the good and concerned members of this site.
even if the good community members didnt reply, or 20 people PM'd a ninja, some other sap would reply and start a flame war.

Locking is here to stay and deletion is for the most part unnecessary. Considering the volume of traffic, a locked thread is off of page one in a few hours.
That is not the case. Unless a thread is locked at peak times, it can stay there for almost a day, and, in the quieter forums, longer than that.


If you really are obsessed about preserving everyone's posting history, move the threads to a newly created section of the forum where all the locked threads can live in peace. just get them off our front pages already.

  • 02.04.2007 10:17 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I like to Rollick

You want to make a new forum, because you have a notion that locked threads might hinder discussion?

Care to prove why it does or explain your reasoning?

  • 02.04.2007 10:22 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Elder Mythic Member

anyone who's played more than you has no life

anyone who's played less than you is a noob

Hmm let me see... When a thread is locked, it takes up space on the first page of a forum section. When space is taken up by pointless [locked] threads, less space is available for actual worthy discussion threads and so they sink into the abyss. When worthy threads disappear, sometimes, just sometimes, they didn't deserve to.

Let's face it, average Joe Bungie doesn't take the time to trawl through pages of his favourite forum, he just clicks on whatever looks good on the first page. He may occasionally venture to the second page, but, guess what, thats full of locked threads too. The third page? you guessed it.

I thought all this was blatantly obvious? I dont really care whichever you want to choose;

trust your moderator's judgement and delete unnecessary threads
OR
move any unnecessary threads to somewhere other than the front page of a forum.

  • 02.04.2007 10:27 AM PDT

My Zune Profile
The Flood's Resident /b/tard

AIM: BruisesToYellow
Because you are what you eat, and you know what it is.

Posted by: BobBQ
We don't delete topics because it disrupts the harmonic resonance flux of the anthropic landscape.

I can see how spam is a much better alternative.

  • 02.04.2007 10:27 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I like to Rollick

Well, if the thread is worthy for discussion the thread creator would be more involved in keeping the discussion going, and other people will bookmark it.

Posted by: necare
Hmm let me see... When a thread is locked, it takes up space on the first page of a forum section. When space is taken up by pointless [locked] threads, less space is available for actual worthy discussion threads and so they sink into the abyss. When worthy threads disappear, sometimes, just sometimes, they didn't deserve to.


  • 02.04.2007 10:32 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Elder Mythic Member

anyone who's played more than you has no life

anyone who's played less than you is a noob

You just don't get it do you.

If there are locked threads on the front page of a forum, fewer threads will be seen AND HENCE fewer people will see these threads. If only 50% of the people see a thread as a result of locked threads, how the hell is worthy discussion supposed to occur? why not GET RID OF THE LOCKED THREADS and have 100% of people see what should be on the front page?

I'm writing in Swahili or something?

Posted by: Sketto
Well, if the thread is worthy for discussion the thread creator would be more involved in keeping the discussion going, and other people will bookmark it.

Posted by: necare
Hmm let me see... When a thread is locked, it takes up space on the first page of a forum section. When space is taken up by pointless [locked] threads, less space is available for actual worthy discussion threads and so they sink into the abyss. When worthy threads disappear, sometimes, just sometimes, they didn't deserve to.


  • 02.04.2007 10:37 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I like to Rollick

Why not delete the threads? Because in threads that have worthy discussion in them usually are nurtured by the thread starter and bookmarked by other people so regardless of the locked threads the threads will be replied to and brought to the front page.

If no one cares about a thread enough to look for it then it probably doesn't have intense discussion.

Now in your reply you forget about if a thread has worthy discussion or not, and say that if there's locked threads on the front page then people can't see the threads. Does that hinder discussion?

What about that the reason that no one can see those threads not on the front pages is because that no one cares about them enough to reply to them because there is no worthy discussion in them?

Your argument mainly hinges I would believe that no one looks past the first page, even if there is nothing interesting on the front page. 50% is a reach and even then people will look on the second page if half the front page is locked.

  • 02.04.2007 10:51 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Elder Mythic Member

anyone who's played more than you has no life

anyone who's played less than you is a noob

i thought writing it in bold and caps might make Sketto actually read and try to understand what someone else has written.

Posted by: Recon Number 54
You're welcome to disagree, but the policy comes from our superiors. We understand and we comply with it.


Ah, i see. So your previous post isn't what you believe but 'protocol'? Or do you too believe it? if so, would you [or anyone] like to point out any huge errors or assumptions in my post, and show me that, indeed, having a bunch of locked threads on the front page of a forum does nothing to visibility and participation therein of positive threads?

  • 02.04.2007 10:53 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Elder Mythic Member

anyone who's played more than you has no life

anyone who's played less than you is a noob

Posted by: Sketto
If no one cares about a thread enough to look for it then it probably doesn't have intense discussion.


how does anyone have a chance of looking for it if they never knew it existed?

i give up.

  • 02.04.2007 10:56 AM 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

[quote]Posted by: necare
You just don't get it do you.

If there are locked threads on the front page of a forum, fewer threads will be seen AND HENCE fewer people will see these threads. If only 50% of the people see a thread as a result of locked threads, how the hell is worthy discussion supposed to occur? why not GET RID OF THE LOCKED THREADS and have 100% of people see what should be on the front page?

I'm writing in Swahili or something?
[quote]

Yelling will get you no where. People tand to not listen to those who yell or get mad.

The reason for keeping locked threads at the top is so that people will see it and will know, or be abl to, find out why it was locked so that they will not make the same mistake and get there threads locked.

And your writin in German, not Swahili.

  • 02.04.2007 10:56 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Elder Mythic Member

anyone who's played more than you has no life

anyone who's played less than you is a noob

Posted by: Recon Number 54
Having a "huge number of locked threads on the front page of a forum" may be (to you) a hindrance to participation and discussion. That is your conclusion when looking at the situation.

My point is that when I see a "huge number of locked threads on the front page of the forum" I come to the conclusion that many members made threads that violated the rules and that a moderator was doing their job.

You see, we both look at the same situation and come to different conclusions as to what it represents.

They are not mutually exclusive. I also come to the conclusion that locked threads = moderators locking threads = moderators doing their job. Saying locked threads hinder discussion does not mean that is the only conclusion. having one opinion does not mean you are not allowed another. [i.e. what follows it pointless]

I am of the opinion that if people were using the forums properly, there would be fewer locked threads "cluttering things up". It appears that your opinion is that the locked threads are the problem as they prevent people from using the forums as they were intended. I say that they are the result of the forums not being used as they are intended.
They are both true. Is that hard to understand? move the threads off the page.

Are the moderators still doing their job? yes.
Is discussion being hindered? no.

the question is, do you want locked threads on the front of a forum? if so, why? having locked threads will not stop users violating the rules.

But our disagreement is unlikely to change the practice.
of course not! how silly of me to consider it.

[Edited on 2/4/2007]

  • 02.04.2007 11:19 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3