Why do threads get locked?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

In response to [whatever]

1) could be a magnet for random googlers
2) or random abuse
3) legal / libel reasons?

Others?

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:30 (twenty-two years ago)

Marissa Marchant

― Be sure to Loop! Loop, Loop, Loop. (ex machina), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Posted in the moderator forum. by me.

Why was the Aja thread locked?
----------

Was it that different than any other thread? What's the deal with Aja anyway? Why are threads being locked at all that aren't, I dunno, criminal or dangerous? Serious question.
-- Skottie (n...), May 25th, 2004.

And do moderators answer questions in the moderator forum?

― Skottie, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:33 (twenty-two years ago)

They do (from what I've seen) but it can take some time...

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:33 (twenty-two years ago)

Because it is blatantly obvious to anyone who had been looking at these boards for any length of time that they are going to degenerate into pointless sniping and infighting of the worst kind?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:34 (twenty-two years ago)

See also the eighteen million other threads we've had on this subject. Also I think a mod should lock this one just for a laugh.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Plenty of threads do that and don't get locked

― Dadaismus (Dada), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:35 (twenty-two years ago)

This thread has been locked by an administrator

― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:35 (twenty-two years ago)

something about a police state & kittens losing their mittens of self destruction. its hard to keep up

― kephm, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Natty Threadlocks Inna ILX

― Dadaismus (Dada), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:36 (twenty-two years ago)

Because it is blatantly obvious to anyone who had been looking at these boards for any length of time that they are going to degenerate into pointless sniping and infighting of the worst kind?

Bingo.

Also, I just can't be fucked with this shit anymore. There are some great threads on ILX these days - why should I let the bullshit ones take up valuable server resources?

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:36 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh Ken, you wag.

― Liz :x (Liz :x), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:36 (twenty-two years ago)

4) because the topic has been done already and it's still feasible to post to the older thread (i.e. it's not over 1000 posts or full of heavy imagery etc.).

5) because you are dragging up a subject that a lot of people are fed up with already and those people carry some sway round these parts maybe (not saying this is right, but it is annoying and off-putting)

6) because you are doing a 'copycat' thread just for cheap laughs - again i am not particularly adverse to this although other people have been recently and have locked the threads, somewhat unfairly i feel

(er - multiple x-post)

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:36 (twenty-two years ago)

Because it is blatantly obvious to anyone who had been looking at these boards for any length of time that they are going to degenerate into pointless sniping and infighting of the worst kind?

OTM.

(NOTE: If you click the "Show All Details" link you can get more info about moderator actions on a particular thread.)

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:37 (twenty-two years ago)

if i marry a girl she'll be a waga mama

― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:37 (twenty-two years ago)

xpost

― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:37 (twenty-two years ago)

i'm in favour of old threads that didn't go anywhere and weren't really intended to being locked as pointless revivals kinda irk

i'm also in favour of hats for dogs

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Hmmm. Well, okay. But this latest thread in question was locked in a matter of minutes. Seems weird to me. I don't know about the infighting, but the question of whether Aja is a real kid or an old troll is sort of interesting. In a meta meta meta kind of way.

― Skottie, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:38 (twenty-two years ago)

ken c has been locked by an administrator.

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Copycat thread? Umm, no. A simple enquiry about if a particular ILXer had gone. Granted, no news was forthcoming, but there you go.

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:38 (twenty-two years ago)

i didn't mean YOU mark

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:40 (twenty-two years ago)

So this question and Matt DC's response to it should be added to a new version of the old, outdated, horribly vague FAQ and this thread should probably be locked then, right

― TOMBOT, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:40 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm sick of Aja, and conversation about Aja. She's taken up way more space here than she deserves, and I'd rather it not continue after her departure.

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:41 (twenty-two years ago)

meta meat meat is so 2001

xpost "meta meat meat" i think i have found my new handle

― kephm, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:41 (twenty-two years ago)

(Note to self: get around to rewriting a draft FAQ sonner rather than later)

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:42 (twenty-two years ago)

Why the fuck do you stick around, Tom? Just about every post I see you make is some narky comment about the way things are here. It doesn't make sense.

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:43 (twenty-two years ago)

heh, that seems to apply to several other people as well. to be fair i think he has a point.

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:44 (twenty-two years ago)

(as in Tom has a point. but then so does ANdrew of course)

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:44 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/oliphant/oa048.jpg

― Ajazay, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Why the aja hate? (That's a rhetorical question, don't worry). I know the dantie board biz but there you go. My last post on the subject, back to the other stuff...

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:46 (twenty-two years ago)

I only say that because I've been noticing Tom's comments a lot more than anybody else. Maybe because his name is all capitals.

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Why the aja hate?

WHY THE AJA THREAD MARK?

(people don't hate Aja, they just hate seeing her mentioned all the time)

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:48 (twenty-two years ago)

I'd rather it not continue after her departure

So she has departed?

― Skottie, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:48 (twenty-two years ago)

WHO FUCKING CARES?????????????

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:49 (twenty-two years ago)

She's dead. Happy now?

― Dadaismus (Dada), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:49 (twenty-two years ago)

I mean, for fuck's sake: "Oh no, the twelve-year-old girl left! Whatever will I do?"

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:49 (twenty-two years ago)

So she has departed?

I assume so. But again, WHO CARES?

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:50 (twenty-two years ago)

Andrew: I stick around because I like some of the people here.

Your appraisal of my relationship with this board is probably a bit biased because whenever you and I are posting on the same thread it's likely to be one that's moderation-related and therefore yes, I'm going to have some words about the policies. I would love to help Dan rewrite a draft FAQ if at all possible because I honestly would rather contribute to solving what I see as the problems here than continue bitching and moaning.

― TOMBOT, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:50 (twenty-two years ago)

It was a passing thought. Maybe, there are other ILXors I'd ask about. Kate disappeared for a while, but I now know why, and that's cool. I liked Aja's posts, they were OK. If people have been overdebating her presence, and others are pissed off with it, im a little bit sorry for asking. Over and out for real. Unless somene else has a question.

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:51 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm sorry Tom for misjudging you.

We're both obviously quite opinionated and our opinions conflict in some areas, which makes it difficult for me to like you. (A shortcoming in my character, unfortunately.)

I've intentionally made moderation policy not my business, so any help you'd like to lend to Dan and the rest of the crew would (I'm sure) be most appreciated by them.

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:52 (twenty-two years ago)

ANY HELP WOULD BE APPRECIATED (because I am deeply deeply lazy).

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:53 (twenty-two years ago)

What?

― Enrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:53 (twenty-two years ago)

Mark fwiw I think a more general 'ILXors - where are they now?' type thread would've been better received, but it's easy to say that with hindsight I know. It's just that that's something more people could have contributed to and would've cared about. It was hard for me to see how your question was inspired by anything other than an urge to bait (esp, as you admitted you didn't care enough to want to contact her directly).

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:54 (twenty-two years ago)

Only 3 years till she's legal guys

― Be sure to Loop! Loop, Loop, Loop. (ex machina), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:55 (twenty-two years ago)

WHO FUCKING CARES?????????????

Ultimately, I don't care. I won't say/ask/post anything else about it. I found it mildly interesting, as did, apparently, several other people on the original thread. I didn't know this was such a sore topic. I still don't understand the moderators' respective ire surrounding the topic. But I guess I don't really care about that either.

― Skottie, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Why do threads get locked?

Answers

-- Be sure to Loop! Loop, Loop, Loop. (¡Û¡Ù¢¾♋¡¡Ý¡è¥Ø@JW¢Ü♫), May 25th, 2004.

― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Just because some folks found talking about Aja irritating shouldn't be a reason to lock a perfectly innocent thread about her "true" identity, should it? I'd find it somewhar weird if normal, non-threatening discussions about certain topics aren't allowd anymore if some mods don't want read them. Well, you don't have to read them, you can just skip the those threads.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:57 (twenty-two years ago)

One of the great ILX cycles is when a poster goes from "annoying" to "persecuted".

― bnw (bnw), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:58 (twenty-two years ago)

it's a rite of passage

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:59 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't do baiting.

I post under my own name (no reflection on those who do not), baiting would be very stupid.

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 13:59 (twenty-two years ago)

if only we could lock discussions (read threads) in *real life*. or rather no: i am all for keeping threads open. my opinion is: if it annoys you, ignore it.

I don't do baiting.
i now have "don't go breaking my heart" stuck in my head as: don't go baiting my thread. hmm

― jesus nathalie (nathalie), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:00 (twenty-two years ago)

It has nothing to do with whether Aja is annoying or not, it has to do with 'threads about Aja' and for that matter 'threads about Marcello' or 'threads about Doomie' being some sort of call-to-arms for the usual suspects to start kicking shit out of each other.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Who are the usual suspects? Oops, no, better not ask that

― Dadaismus (Dada), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:01 (twenty-two years ago)

I am in favour of as much thread-locking as any given moderator feels appropriate at any given time.

I am not in favour of posters gaining the impression that this forum is a place for free speech.

― Tim (Tim), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:02 (twenty-two years ago)

I know aout the marcello/doomie stuff, they are both grown adults they can deal with it.

I didn't know Aja was a sore point with people.

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:02 (twenty-two years ago)

i guess people posting here has to actually understand the fact that although rules are mostly pretty relaxed, it's not actually a free forum. You chose to use it and by doing so whoever owns this place has to right to do whatever, which is fair enough. And it's not as if Andrew has been stamping his authority everywhere.

i kind of like Aja. She's kinda dumb, and it makes me feel good about myself for being not as dumb.

― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:02 (twenty-two years ago)

what about threads about Kate Lawler? i'm not keen on those either

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:03 (twenty-two years ago)

One of the great ILX cycles is when a poster goes from "annoying" to "persecuted".

Completely OTM.

The other cycle is when the moderators start extending the rules that the "persecuted" operate under to the general populace and 8 million vocal asshats shriek "YOU ARE OVERSTEPPING YOUR AUTHORITY I CAN SAY WHAT I WANT!!!!" (nb bnw I hope you realize that this is in no way directed towards you)

Tim H is also completely, absolutely, totally 100% OTM.

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:03 (twenty-two years ago)

That Aja thread had little shit-kicking. I've nothing against locking offensive threads, but that didn't seem to be the case here.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:04 (twenty-two years ago)

I didn't know Aja was a sore point with people.
-- mark grout

oh COME ON!

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:04 (twenty-two years ago)

I MEan it!
(was going to go full caps, thought better of it)

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:05 (twenty-two years ago)

the 'Marcello: man or myth' thread was not locked, tho i really wouldn't mind if it was - in fact perhaps it IS best that it is (it seems dead now anyway, as does the other baiting thread that spawned it)

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:06 (twenty-two years ago)

Also, I know this isn't a free speech forum, but I still wish threads would be locked only for more serious reasons than someone finding them "irritating".

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:06 (twenty-two years ago)

Matt you're a fucking ilxorologist. You are so OTM it hurts.

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:06 (twenty-two years ago)

Tuomas your scandinavian idealism is not welcome here!

(I joke!)

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:07 (twenty-two years ago)

(haha stevem, the Marcello thread was eventually locked; that's why it died down!)

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:07 (twenty-two years ago)

I wasn't bothered about the other thread being locked, not greatly. I don't know what the big issue was.

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:09 (twenty-two years ago)

As an ILM mod, let me just say that Dan and Tom drafting a new FAQ/policy thing would be fantastic. My sympathies tend towards the Dan/Andrew/Tim/Matt DC bent in general while Tom has raised many good points that need addressing for consistency's sake.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:10 (twenty-two years ago)

fair enough, tim, but as you've seen people continue to make these threads. so i am all for complete democracy (unless it harms someone naturally). my point is: where do you draw the line?

― jesus nathalie (nathalie), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:10 (twenty-two years ago)

And now, back to the testcard and some music.

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:10 (twenty-two years ago)

What's worst is when people set themselves above the bullshit when they're quite capable of descending into it.

― Enrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:11 (twenty-two years ago)

people keep saying they don't know what the problem is with such and such. i suggest that as well as updating the FAQ the Search Function be linked from the top of the page in big flashing letters.

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:11 (twenty-two years ago)

Matt is totally OTM and says what I am thinking (ie it's a bit stupid to have threads about specific people in general anyway, as it leads to nothing good really), but OTOH if no one actually goes and makes this clear or enforces the idea with some form of consistency you're going to have this problem over and over and over again. Vague lockdowns/deletions on threads similar to other threads and not yet negative -> person feeling persecuted and getting "stroppy" -> moderators being pissy and saying "WHO CARES" -> other people being like hang on what -> mobius strip goes loop loop loop loop loop loop loop rinse and repeat as necessary.

this is an xpost, what Ned said basically. I mean, it's just human nature. Tim is wholly OTM as per usual on the subject but you can't stop people from being human beings.

― Allyzay, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:12 (twenty-two years ago)

i am all for complete democracy

This won't work, ever. Sorry.

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:13 (twenty-two years ago)

What would I look for? Anyway. If there's been an agument/fite about it, I don't want to pick through the bones. If there's been issues about the paticular person, that's their issue not mine. < / ends>

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:13 (twenty-two years ago)

this thread does not come from a humble backround. why do locks get threaded?

― kephm, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:14 (twenty-two years ago)

I'd defer to Andrew because it's his gaff, but there's a lot of boilerplate authoritarian personality democracy-is-for-shit faux-sophisticated glibbery attaching to the position.

― Enrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Background, and the main reason why people are sick and tired of Aja threads, as if there is anything anyone could want to know about a 12 year old girl that thousands of posts and umpteen threads haven't already unearthed

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:15 (twenty-two years ago)

why do locks get threaded?

now it would be just highlarious if someone started a thread titled that

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Okay, here's a quote from the FAQ:

Threads can be deleted but we don't like to do it often and will not delete a thread apart from in exceptional circumstances. These include:

- Libellous threads. If we think a thread might be libellous it might be deleted. This hasn't happened very often.

- Personal threads. If a thread is started discussing a registered user or their actions, that user has the right to ask for it to be deleted or locked. The thread does not have to be an attack on the user. This does not apply to threads users start themselves and later regret.

- Offensive threads. At their discretion, moderators can delete entire threads which are likely to cause offence. It happens very rarely - threads which are racially or sexually abusive are the most likely. Even then moderators might not delete the thread, if an offensive question seems likely to provoke debate. If you find a thread offensive, please say on the thread or email a moderator about it.

The other sorts of threads that will get deleted are unanswered duplicate threads and spam by unregistered users (see below).

Locking a thread involves changing the settings so the thread survives but new answers cannot be posted to it. This has in the past been used as a compromise between deletion and non-deletion for controversial threads, but is more likely to be used when several threads on the same topic occur at the same time - eg when a big news event takes place and gets discussed on ILE, moderators may lock threads to minimise confusion.

I think these rules are fine as they are, and most of the time the moderators do an excellent job in executing them. It was just this particular instance (locking the Aja thread) which I found a bit weird.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:16 (twenty-two years ago)

I agree with the last but one thing Enrique said

― Dadaismus (Dada), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:16 (twenty-two years ago)

I dont want to know about a 12 year old girl. Or anything. It was a passing thought, not worth all this, I'm being dragged into.

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:17 (twenty-two years ago)

anything anyone could want to know about a 12 year old girl that thousands of posts and umpteen threads haven't already unearthed

hi!

― random googler (ken c), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:19 (twenty-two years ago)

I'd defer to Andrew because it's his gaff, but there's a lot of boilerplate authoritarian personality democracy-is-for-shit faux-sophisticated glibbery attaching to the position.

A shorter phrase for that is "experience".

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:19 (twenty-two years ago)

i am from too humble of a backround to start such a threadstevem. meta meat meat over an pout

― kephm, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:19 (twenty-two years ago)

Attach the stone of shame!

― stonecutters (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:19 (twenty-two years ago)

I vote "Delete this thread!"

Thanks.

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:20 (twenty-two years ago)

Cue thread on "thread deletion" to add to threads on "thread locking"

― Dadaismus (Dada), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:21 (twenty-two years ago)

I find drawing the line quite easy: the moderators moderate according to what they think is best and that suits me. I mean, drafting rules for these things is particularly difficult because sometimes there's a kind of mood about the place which requires a bit of dealing with, and hard-and-fast rules have trouble performing that role. I think moderation here is on-the-whole decent and I'm all for it.

As far as 'democracy' goes, discussing moderation decisions, even controversial ones, on a case-by-case basis is lame but if people find it fulfilling or fun that's fine by me. You wanna elect moderators? I don't.

Mostly I don't want posters to get the impression that this is a free speech forum, because I don't want people to feel that they can say absolutely anything. If certain people on the boards were generally as pleasant decent as you are, Nath, then that might be different.

The other thing is, I think a bit of semi-random thread-locking (with the accompanying squawks) spices up dull afternoons. And too much consistency sucks.

― Tim (Tim), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:21 (twenty-two years ago)

mega x post, obv. Ah, a bit of meta for a Tuesday afternoon. I love it!

― Tim (Tim), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:22 (twenty-two years ago)

I am still in favour of nominating Mr Perry to lock threads when they reach their comic peak. Ahoy organised fun!

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:24 (twenty-two years ago)

A shorter phrase for that is "experience".

I think I'm in a somewhat unique position, having been participating in online 'communities' of various descriptions since I was 10 years old.

You wanna elect moderators? I don't.

This will never happen.

Mostly I don't want posters to get the impression that this is a free speech forum, because I don't want people to feel that they can say absolutely anything.

YAY! You're my hero. :-)

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:24 (twenty-two years ago)

democracy here is for shit because we have no way of arriving at decisions. This is not exactly a place where Robert's Rules of Order can be applied, much less a ballot box.

Therefore a new FAQ (which admittedly is not so much a FAQ as it is a moderator guidelines document with a few technical hints & tips) needs to 1. allow as much free discussion as possible while 2. providing a clearly delimited thread locking & post-control policy for the management of trolling (and thus a clear definition of what trolling and baiting and flaming are so that if/when somebody askes this kind of question AGAIN, and they will, Dan et al. can say "FAQ SECTION C PARAGRAPH 7 LINE ONE" (which clearly states that threads which discuss specific individual posters are no longer encouraged and may be locked at any time) and the argument is over.

― TOMBOT, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:24 (twenty-two years ago)

"Oh Kent, I'd be LYING if I said my men weren't committing crimes..."

― Vigilantism (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh but Tom you like this argument more than anyone! how can you be wanting to ruin your own fun?

― Tim (Tim), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:25 (twenty-two years ago)

Your thread is at risk if you do not keep up with moderator guidelines

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:25 (twenty-two years ago)

Your thread is on the way to destruction.

― bnw (bnw), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:26 (twenty-two years ago)

I am just a little bit Type A in the personality department.

― TOMBOT, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:27 (twenty-two years ago)

a clear definition of what trolling and baiting and flaming are so that if/when somebody askes this kind of question AGAIN, and they will, Dan et al. can say "FAQ SECTION C PARAGRAPH 7 LINE ONE"

Is it not easier to say "Trolling is what Andrew and the delegated moderators say it is" ? I think that would work well.

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:27 (twenty-two years ago)

whowillpolice @ thepolice.com

I sincerely hope you are joking.

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:27 (twenty-two years ago)

they got a bit out of control after 'Synchronicity' imo

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:28 (twenty-two years ago)

I am actually in favor of spelling things out somewhat (as I have said before) largely because doing so would take the perceived or real element of moderator capriciousness out of things (which may be a bad thing in the long run, at least as far as my secret Internet putsch is concerned).

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:29 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm considering that maybe an iron-fist rule would be a grand thing. If perceived violations were struck down with an almighty force, albeit sparingly, then maybe we'd see a change for the better in general trends around here (or at least some sort of stasis).

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:29 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't want to have a massive argument here, I just thought the "Who is Aja really?" discussion was kinda interesting, and was disappointed to see the thread locked.

Obviously, this isn't a democracy, and we all chose to come here, but if threads begin to get locked on less-than-clear-basis, many posters might opt to move elsewhere. This isn't the case with ILX, I'm just drawing a worst-case-scenario here, but this is why I think guidelines for moderation should be rather clear.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:30 (twenty-two years ago)

if only the Interweb was a great big bierhall Dang

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:31 (twenty-two years ago)

Well I don't think we'd end up in that situation simply because the moderators have no interest in fucking everything up here. None of us (well, neither Dan nor I) are power trippers.

I think strict guidelines explaining what is and isn't allowed are possibly a bad idea. Having to explain your actions in this realm is very difficult, even if you and others agree it's pretty reasonable. The moderators do have each other and many trusted regulars (like yourself, Tuomas) to point out when things get out of control.

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:32 (twenty-two years ago)

At the end of the day, more people are going to want to move elsewhere because of threads like the one linked to above than because of moderators locking/deleting a few threads occasionally. And the people that do move elsewhere because of a gripe over moderating policy are nine times out of ten unlikely to be the people I would miss.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:32 (twenty-two years ago)

My problem with that, Andrew, is that there have been way too many fucking times where several other non-moderators have watched trolling and baiting go on and the moderators did nothing. Hard and fast rules, well documented, do not only serve to save time in that there won't be so many arguments like this one for thousands of posts, they also serve to enable posters to tell the moderator "HEY SECTION C PARAGRAPH 11" (where it is clearly stated that threads discussing b4ngbus and n3croph1lia are not encouraged and may be locked at any time) and encourage consistent enforcement.

xpost what Dan said I do not type fast enuf

― TOMBOT, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:32 (twenty-two years ago)

TOMBOT IXNAY ON DRAWING ATTENTION TO THE UTSCHPAY

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:39 (twenty-two years ago)

matt otm

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:40 (twenty-two years ago)

I favour a perception of moderator capriciousness. The actuality I'm unsure about.

― Tim (Tim), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:41 (twenty-two years ago)

Well I don't think we'd end up in that situation simply because the moderators have no interest in fucking everything up here. None of us (well, neither Dan nor I) are power trippers.

Fair enough, Andrew, I do trust you mods. I just thought you shouldn't have locked the Aja thread, but generally I think you're doing a good job, so I shouldn't have gotten overheated because of one thread.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:43 (twenty-two years ago)

who cares

― Ronan (Ronan), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:46 (twenty-two years ago)

We should write up a completely arbitrary moderation policy like a flowchart based on lots of absurd yet very specific conditions for thread locking and deletion and then the moderators keep it to themselves. Each week a few of the gates on the chart are changed or re-routed to different conditions on Sunday at midnight, and the previous week's flowchart diagram is posted to the FAQ as sort of an explanation of what happened to the thread about perfume packaging that contained 5 instances of the word "lovely" and a reference to squeegees followed up by a one-liner from an American that did not show up in the Excelsior thread within 10 minutes of being posted.

― TOMBOT, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Fuck the squeegees, that goes too far.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:49 (twenty-two years ago)

We should generate the flowchart using http://www.research.att.com/sw/tools/graphviz/

― Be sure to Loop! Loop, Loop, Loop. (ex machina), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:49 (twenty-two years ago)

It would also make a fantastic premise for a celebrity game show.

― TOMBOT, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:50 (twenty-two years ago)

That shouldn't be appealing to me as much as it is, should it?

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:50 (twenty-two years ago)

COUNTDOWN TO APPEARANCE ON EXCELSIOR THREAD IN 3 2 1

― Allyzay, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:51 (twenty-two years ago)

That shouldn't be appealing to me as much as it is, should it?

Sounds pretty fucking great to me.

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:52 (twenty-two years ago)

I LOVES ME SOME ARCHERING I DO

― ORNALDO BLOOMPS, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:53 (twenty-two years ago)

While we're being all meta, to whoever has been impersonating me on here - thanks a fucking bunch.

I'm in the middle of moving house, moving away from the place I've lived all my life (dear Ormskirk), I've got an EP to promote soon, and album to make, somebody else's project to prop-up and work on, money worries, shingles and an auntie on the way out. Stress levels through the fucking roof.

I have been walking around all day thinking that I'm actually losing my mind. Thanks a lot.

― Lynskey (Lynskey), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 14:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Lynskey: Can you point at some threads where this has been going on?

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 15:03 (twenty-two years ago)

argh i have two entries on the statsc0ck again. i AM Andre 3000!

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 15:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Will Kanye West win P&J '04?

Thing is - I can almost see myself going off on one with everything that 's going on. "Worse than Hitler" sounds like me. But at the time when that was posted my brother was playing a game online on this PC, I was surrounded by family and friends and I like Kanye West :)

I've changed my password etc. Don't do anything about it - just the knowledge that I'm not going nuts is enough and I don't want to dwell on it or give any dickhead that did it any satisfaction.

― Lynskey (Lynskey), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 15:16 (twenty-two years ago)

shake it stevem

― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 15:19 (twenty-two years ago)

like a polaroid hitler

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 May 2004 15:20 (twenty-two years ago)

!I thought that was a Marcello parody, Lynskey!

― de, Tuesday, 25 May 2004 15:21 (twenty-two years ago)

I can't argue with what Andrew is saying here, but this is also why I find myself drifting away from ILX. It is a game for a few elite to play and everybody is NOT welcome.

― Speedy (Speedy Gonzalas), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 07:57 (twenty-two years ago)

I can't argue with what Andrew is saying here, but this is also why I find myself drifting away from ILX. It is a game for a few elite to play and everybody is NOT welcome.
-- Speedy (MajorTomIsaJunki...), May 26th, 2004.

OF COURSE. But then again, when you think about it, so are most, if not all, online forum boards, which is why detachment is an advisable necessity.

― Fr4ncis W4tlington (Francis Watlington), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 08:11 (twenty-two years ago)

Speedy with respect that it nonsense - ILX is more inclusive than most other forums, everyone's welcome as long as they don't behave like a twat. I think you're letting resentment of a perceived elite cloud your judgement here.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 08:14 (twenty-two years ago)

everyone's welcome as long as they don't behave like a twat

please include on the front page in HUGE flashing letters k thanks baah

― stevem (blueski), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 08:18 (twenty-two years ago)

The only reason this thread exists is because it IS possible to argue with moderators but it ISN'T possible to argue with trolls, Marcello, or random googlers. Everyone knows that even the most meticulous moderators will only delete/lock threads once they have gone BEYOND what they consider acceptable - it's not like we don't have a fair bit of leeway!

So. If you want to use these boards, stay within the realms of consideration for other people. It's not hard.

(yes, yes, pot, kettle, I know, but I have done this whole moderation thing professionally and I do know what I'm talking about, mkay?)

― Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 08:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Who are moderators now? I need to contact one.

― Dr. C (Dr. C), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 10:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Dr C - there's a Moderator Request link at the bottom - they have their own forum now. (It's Dan, Sean C and Skidders unless I'm mistaken).

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 11:02 (twenty-two years ago)

TOMBOT, so OTM that this thread should be locked.

― Spinktor (El Spinktor), Wednesday, 26 May 2004 16:42 (twenty-two years ago)

I remember the situation that led to Burm4kitty leaving, and it seemed to me to be the forcing out of an Untouchable. The C-m4n problems, Sm4sh, and many others have felt the same way to me. I understand that these can be difficult issues, but I don't have to agree with the way that they were handled.
It sucks that the forum can be ruined by a popularity contest.
And as to how this thread started (with the locking of the Aja, thread) I was disappointed in the locking of it only because I was reading it, therefore interested in the subject (as entertainment.)

― Speedy (Speedy Gonzalas), Thursday, 27 May 2004 16:47 (twenty-two years ago)

What happened to Burmakitty? All i remember was a bunch of "your a bad parent" mud being tossed back and forth...and something about Mission of Burma being the worst band ever. C-man always makes me laugh.

I say let it be.

― Spinktor au de toilette (El Spinktor), Thursday, 27 May 2004 17:12 (twenty-two years ago)

all your threads should be deleted

― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 27 May 2004 20:31 (twenty-two years ago)

It was a "What do you look like" thread and someone disapproved of BK's photo choices. I thought that not only were they not obscene, they were very good photos of a woman who wanted to show off a bit. And I thought "good on ya" but OMG did the shit come down. It was the biggest High School smack-down ever. And the cheerleader won.

― Speedy (Speedy Gonzalas), Saturday, 29 May 2004 00:17 (twenty-two years ago)

Burmakitty stopped posting for some reason, but I believe she may have posted under her daughter's name (Aja) on occaission. I believe Aja's father posted here as well. In any case, I don't see why it warrants such discussion.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Saturday, 29 May 2004 01:58 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't see why it warrants such discussion

Does that mean it shouldn't be discussed? Not that I plan to discuss it ever again.

We need server resources for topics like
xpost (39 new answers)
Muffins? (3 new answers, 16 total)
THIS is the best thread ever (43 new answers)
This is where we celebrate our favorite cookies. (36 new answers)

― Skottie, Saturday, 29 May 2004 04:10 (twenty-two years ago)

Does that mean it shouldn't be discussed? Not that I plan to discuss it ever again.

Well, not that it shouldn't be discussed. I just don't understand why people here are so perturbed/preoccupied by it.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Saturday, 29 May 2004 04:18 (twenty-two years ago)

It's either Aja or Everybody Loves Raymond. Don't make me choose, I'm begging you!

― Skottie, Saturday, 29 May 2004 04:32 (twenty-two years ago)

threads get locked because some people start duplicate threads !

― DJ Martian (djmartian), Tuesday, 8 June 2004 20:24 (twenty-two years ago)

there is that...

― mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 9 June 2004 12:43 (twenty-two years ago)

three years pass...

this is important

― gershy, Sunday, 11 November 2007 05:00 (eighteen years ago)

http://bdsmdvdblog.com/wp-images/review/Pinko._2D.Europe.sex.details._232.ENG.001.jpg

― kenan, Sunday, 11 November 2007 05:09 (eighteen years ago)

(it's the Europe part that's so offensive, not the sex details)

― kenan, Sunday, 11 November 2007 05:09 (eighteen years ago)

"miguel loco"

― gershy, Sunday, 11 November 2007 05:10 (eighteen years ago)

I love that it's called "Sex Details." Like, translator, anyone?

Direct from Italy, we bring you: Sex Meeting Minutes. Available in Excel or printable PDF.

― kenan, Sunday, 11 November 2007 05:13 (eighteen years ago)

http://www.rumormillnews.com/Images/Stringer-Bell.JPG

"Nigga, is you taking notes on a European porn movie?"

― kenan, Sunday, 11 November 2007 05:16 (eighteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.