[lily.]

...a read-only area of the forum where locked threads could be put for a short period. That way, they're out of the main boards, but still available for people to see what went wrong.


I've seen it work in other places. One of the forums I used to go on had a section for them, and they'd stay there for a week or two then be removed completely... thus giving members a chance to see where they went.

Thoughts?

[Mark]

That area exists. You just can't see it

[lily.]

Yeah, I know you don't 'delete' stuff.

But, would a temporary area (which can be seen) be something which would work?

[Mark]

Yes and No I guess. Yes for threads which just go offtopic, and for spam topics. Not so much for threads which have personal insults, or things like racism... those ones are removed for a reason.

[Jayson]

Cant you have a thread where you announce when a thread is deleted and why?

[lily.]

I personally think that when a thread has racist, offensive and/or insulting posts in it, there's a valid reason for removal, but some threads do seem to be removed for less serious reasons.

Maybe they could just be locked... like I said to you in the Jendary thread.

If there isn't anything offensive in it, I don't really see any reason to completely remove it.

I think a few people were genuinely looking for answers yesterday, and the fact that nobody was prepared to discuss it created the spamming situation.

[Lauren]

I half agree.

The reason I disagree is because I can't see what can be gained from seeing why a thread was locked. The answer is going to be either "arguments" or "spamming". That's all. And you can assume from your thread not being there, that it's been locked and deleted.

Edit: In reference to yesterday, I think most people DID know what was happening and why threads were being locked and they spammed the topics as a "point-making" exercise. I don't mean everyone, but surely if their main issue was wondering why someone was banned, they could've just asked them on msn.

Some of the people banned yesterday wanted to be banned, and went out there way to do so.

[lily.]

Don't you agree that sometimes heavy-handed moderating leads to this kind of thing though Lauren?

[Lauren]

Originally posted by lili
Don't you agree that sometimes heavy-handed moderating leads to this kind of thing though Lauren?

To an extent, but some of the members took it too far I feel yday, and then claimed victimisation.

I do think some of the bans were heavy-handed, however.

[Mrluvaluva]

I think that in certain cases it would be less hassle for the mods/admin just to lock certain threads and not delete them. I agree with Lili's point about last night for instance. Members wanted to know why certain actions took place, and when they got no answers, this lead to spamming etc. This created more work for the mods/admin. If they were simply locked, with reasons being given, I don't think half of what happened would have.

We have been informed to u2u a mod/admin if we have any questions, but I am sure they don't want loads of u2u's from different members asking the same thing.

[Lauren]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva
Members wanted to know why certain actions took place, and when they got no answers, this lead to spamming etc.

Most of them knew the answers though, cos they were on msn. The spamming was to "prove a point".

[lily.]

I don't like to U2U the admin/mods about why a thread was removed.

I'd personally prefer if it was locked, (possibly with some posts edited), and the mod/admin who locked it could put a post at the end with a reason for lockage.

Today, the Jendary was locked. There is no reason given. I deigned to voice my opinion about the disappearing thread situation, and Mark responded and locked it. I still don't know why.

If I'm honest, I didn't expect this thread to stay, but I hoped we could discuss it. I'm glad we are.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by Lauren

Most of them knew the answers though, cos they were on msn. The spamming was to "prove a point".

Oh I agree that happens with certain groups of members on MSN, but that's always going to be the case with some people.

[Twilight]

And i U2U James lastnight he Read it but never replied....

[Jayson]

Originally posted by Twilight
And i U2U James lastnight he Read it but never replied....

He replied to my U2U, ill post it in a min

[Lauren]

Originally posted by Twilight
And i U2U James lastnight he Read it but never replied....

About what? The bans?

[Jayson]

James

They have been spamming the forum with the same thread over and over again.

It's pretty annoying and people have complained about it.

Hugos was for bullying i think

[Twilight]

Originally posted by Lauren

About what? The bans?

About hugo because i never seen he do anything at all

[Lauren]

Originally posted by Twilight

About hugo because i never seen he do anything at all

Don't you speak to him on msn?

Anyway, the people fake-spamming (The ones who knew exactly what had happened and was just doing it to prove a point) were probably the reason James didn't reply.

[Z]

I wasn't here last night, so it'd be nice to have a forum where you could just read locked topics, but other than being nosy there isn't really much of a point to it. I have no idea why some people are banned, and it doesn't affect me in any way that they are, so meh.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally posted by Twilight

About hugo because i never seen he do anything at all

Sometimes you miss things because threads can be removed quickly. That is part of this discussion.

[Z]

Originally posted by Mrluvaluva

Sometimes you miss things because threads can be removed quickly. That is part of this discussion.

Which, out of the context of this topic, is a really good thing haha.

[Tom]

Originally posted by Lauren
I half agree.

The reason I disagree is because I can't see what can be gained from seeing why a thread was locked. The answer is going to be either "arguments" or "spamming". That's all. And you can assume from your thread not being there, that it's been locked and deleted.

Edit: In reference to yesterday, I think most people DID know what was happening and why threads were being locked and they spammed the topics as a "point-making" exercise. I don't mean everyone, but surely if their main issue was wondering why someone was banned, they could've just asked them on msn.

Some of the people banned yesterday wanted to be banned, and went out there way to do so.

But we were asking why, we genuinely didn't know what was going on. The spamming wasn't point making either, it was just to get an answer. The reason it wasn't on MSN is because I don't have the admins on MSN (nor do I want them anyway). Could have gone to u2u? Then again, more than one of us wanted an answer. If they spoke in the thread then it would be easier than saying who said what in u2u, and maybe if other people had something to say they could have.

I don't think anyone wanted banning. But obviously if someone gets banned for not much at all when there is worse going on on the forum then a fuss is going to kicked up. But some of the bans were unjustified anyway, I mean Billy being banned for asking why I was banned?! And if the idea in this thread was put in place then there would be no need for such threads asking why people were banned, and subsequently fewer bannings for that, given much worse goes on on the forum anyway.