Locking Threads.... What's Your Opinion

[veggieprincess]

So I can't help but wonder about others opinions on locking threads.

 

I get a sense that many are in favor it... but I'm not really.

 

Unless it gets REALLY offensive where everyone is calling eachother names and I've only seen that happen in 1 thread, but yet I've watched like 5 get locked over the past few months.

 

The way I see it is that if we don't have differences of opinion, we don't learn from eachother.

 

One of the threads awhile back was a debate about eating honey from farms that use very humane bee keeping practices. Ande Suna kind of opened my eyes to her viewpoint... and although I still don't eat honey, I got a better understanding of why some Raw Foodists choose to, and that thread was locked, but if it people hadn't stepped in with their passionate convictions, I wouldn't have seen both sides to the argument.

 

And on the thread that was locked today...... yeah some of the posts were predictably harsh from the same people who get predictably harsh... but weight is a very sensitive issue, especially for women and most of the thread was about wheter or not to confront those close to us with that subject so of course people are gonna have strong opinions about that. Although some posts angered me... I think it does more of a disservice to lock it because how we can learn from eachother or see viewpoints other than our own from locking the threads all of the time? People get PASSIONATE about their opinions... but I just feel that a bit too much censorship goes on sometimes.

 

I know that Robert tries very hard to keep things positive, but should we be exercising borderline censorship just because some people have some strong viewpoints? And I'm not saying some of the posts people make don't annoy me sometimes, but I don't think every thread that gets the least bit contraversial should be locked up.....

 

Thoughts?

[Zack]

I'm not a fan of it.

[robert]

I am quite busy so I trust the administrators and moderators to do whatever they think it best for the community.

 

I don't really have a strong opinion on locking or not locking and it probably varies depending on the situations.

[andesuma]

thanks for the mention girl

I am glad I was able to share my views... although I don't consume raw honey (but I also don't avoid it like the plague...)

I do consume bee pollen and royal jelly occasionally, it depends.

 

I think it is vital for people to know their source.

Be it information or consumption.

 

I also think people need to be kind, and courteous when looking

at a topic of debate and think before they enter a discussion.

Tone is not always conveyed accurately via text (ie. sarcasm).

 

 

 

I do think locking of threads is necessary sometimes... because

there IS a lot of self-righteousness within the vegan community,

that is a given. And some people just want to believe what they want to believe. We all have our own realities and levels of perception.

 

That said, I think it is dependent upon the discussion and subject matter.

I also don't view locking a thread as 'censorship' because you

can easily PM or email the people or person involved and have a discussion outside the forum...

 

[Richard]

I didn't lock that thread, but I think that it does become necessary to lock threads, if people are going to be hostile in debates. I think it's better for somebody to step in an make the best decision for the forum, than let people dig themselves into a confrontation. I think there should always be an explanation within the thread by the person who is locking it, so people understand why it's happened. Also, locking can always be undone if necessary, it isn't a permanent thing. Ideally it would be good to let people say what they want, but I think it can become obvious to people outside a debate that it is a total dead end and will just make everyone involved upset.

 

I think it's a bit unfair to call it "censorship". I don't think that we would ever close a thread just because of the subject matter, unless it was clearly really offensive and useless - in which case it'd probably be deleted altogether. The recent thread-locking is just due to the way in which people are talking to each other, and after not responding to posts trying to cool them off, it seems best to lock up.

[pazios2002]

what weight thread?

[Neoveg]

I guess sometimes it is neccessary...Although I think there should be a pointing out of a policy or a reason given, or the subject will surely surface again. We are all in this together to help ourselves as well as each other. There are different ages, demographics, religions, and general culture differences that make it difficult at times, but I think everyone has a voice.

[xveganjoshx]

And on the thread that was locked today...... yeah some of the posts were predictably harsh from the same people who get predictably harsh...

I behaved myself yesterday. Mostly because I've been studying for finals.

[plc3]

Although I didn't get a pm or email indicating so, I believe the thread was closed because of my comment. After a lot of thought, I realize that my comment was uncalled for and I apologize. I do not wish harm on anyone (physical or mental). I let my emotions post that response without letting reason preview it.

 

As far as locking threads, the mods have to do what they feel is best. If there is a particular person or post that caused the thread to be locked, that person should be notified.

[Guest]

I don't like it unless the environment gets extremely hostile...granted my definition of extremely hostile is different than most. Plus I think its unfare to most posters when someone gets the final word in and locks the thread. I'm on pretty much all the time so that doesn't concern me most of the time but for the sake of others I don't like it.

 

PLC...don't worry I'm gonna continue to call fat people fat. Even though beforewisdom thinks I'm being a meanypants. Its our right to let people know they're hurting everyone and not just themselves.

Edited May 8, 2008 by Anonymous

[Richard]

The mentality of wanting to get the last word in is part of the problem. Once a conversation has got to that point, where people are just trying to trump each other, I think it's pretty futile, it's no longer a discussion, it's some kind of erotic S&M battle and that's why they get closed. If people are talking calmly / politely to each other with no insults, it won't get closed, but once the flies are unzipped and the tape measures come out, I think we can all do without it

[Tasha]

I don't like it unless the environment gets extremely hostile...granted my definition of extremely hostile is different than most. Plus I think its unfare to most posters when someone gets the final word in and locks the thread. I'm on pretty much all the time so that doesn't concern me most of the time but for the sake of others I don't like it.

 

PLC...don't worry I'm gonna continue to call fat people fat. Even though beforewisdom thinks I'm being a meanypants. Its our right to let people know they're hurting everyone and not just themselves.

 

 

Yes I found it !!! This episode was on last night.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evCj25UtfLM&feature=related

[michaelhobson]

Thread locking should be rare and always with a posted explanation of who closed it and why, no exceptions.

 

In the past, heated debates have often come full circle and resolved themselves amicably among those involved. Locking the thread doesn't alllow for that natural progression.

[Richard]

In the past, heated debates have often come full circle and resolved themselves amicably among those involved. Locking the thread doesn't alllow for that natural progression.

 

Got a link to where that ever happened? All I ever remember is people getting more and more angry until they shoot everyone in their office hte next day, perhaps there are some exceptions, but I don't think it's the natural progression for people to kiss and make up unfortunately in these situations. That would be better if people had it in them to get over their differences, but I think there are certain personalities who want to keep going in an argument until everyone else gives up. When you get more than 1 of those kinds of people, you end up with 5,000 pages of balls

[michaelhobson]

In the past, heated debates have often come full circle and resolved themselves amicably among those involved. Locking the thread doesn't alllow for that natural progression.

 

Got a link to where that ever happened? All I ever remember is people getting more and more angry until they shoot everyone in their office hte next day, perhaps there are some exceptions, but I don't think it's the natural progression for people to kiss and make up unfortunately in these situations. That would be better if people had it in them to get over their differences, but I think there are certain personalities who want to keep going in an argument until everyone else gives up. When you get more than 1 of those kinds of people, you end up with 5,000 pages of balls

 

I haven't seen any of the locked threads, so I'm not familiar with the personalities involved. But, if we end up with 5,000 pages of balls, so what? Pages of balls are free and maybe these folks will finally tire themselves out and shut up.

[Lean and Green]

granted my definition of extremely hostile is different than most.

 

I am glad I have yet to be in a disagreement with you. There's no going up against a man who has an arsenal of pots at his disposal! That and a 10lb tub of tofu being hurled at me, leads me to believe i'd back off b/f getting into an altercation with you

 

As far as a thread being locked. I guess it depends. Yeh the whole pm situation is good for continuing on conversations and such but it only takes into account two sides of an argument and doesn't allow for others to step in. I guess it all depends on the severity of the situation.

 

I felt so horrible when the thread I made about bee products became locked. I felt almost as if I caused the controversy when all I wanted was some insight as far as to why people behave certain ways and what led them to do so comfortably. I got those answers by asking the question and was very happy and now understand a lot more on the matter. Unfortunately it steamrolled into all sorts of outlashes and it seemed to get an offensive feel to it. I still feel bad I got my answer at the expense of hostility being generated. However, I wouldn't have known another side of the story unless I asked.

[veganmadre]

I haven't been on the board lately so I just spent the past ten minutes reading over the "Double Standard" thread. I'm extremely disappointed that it's been locked. I can see no other reason for the thread being locked other than thought control. So what if something is offensive? I want to know others opinions and always have the option of avoiding a thread that is too heated for my liking.

[Jay]

In the past, heated debates have often come full circle and resolved themselves amicably among those involved. Locking the thread doesn't alllow for that natural progression.

 

Got a link to where that ever happened? All I ever remember is people getting more and more angry until they shoot everyone in their office hte next day, perhaps there are some exceptions, but I don't think it's the natural progression for people to kiss and make up unfortunately in these situations. That would be better if people had it in them to get over their differences, but I think there are certain personalities who want to keep going in an argument until everyone else gives up. When you get more than 1 of those kinds of people, you end up with 5,000 pages of balls

 

I haven't seen any of the locked threads, so I'm not familiar with the personalities involved. But, if we end up with 5,000 pages of balls, so what? Pages of balls are free and maybe these folks will finally tire themselves out and shut up.

Hey Richard I became pretty good friends with Compassionate Girl. (Although we haven't kept in touch lately.) That after we had that seemingly ridiculous thread about christianity. Locking threads is a great way to destroy a board/community. Get everyone to disagree about something and then.... don't let them resolve it! Make sure it's permanent. Eventually you keep all conversation superficial and meaningless. Talk about the weather or.... I don't know. Being a ninja I guess. Not that there's anything wrong with some of that.

[Jay]

This majestic thing:

viewtopic.php?p=7841&highlight=#7841

[xveganjoshx]

I'm extremely disappointed that it's been locked. I can see no other reason for the thread being locked other than thought control. So what if something is offensive? I want to know others opinions and always have the option of avoiding a thread that is too heated for my liking.

 

I agree.

 

I wonder if a few of the later posts were deleted and THEN the thread was locked? Because as it stands now, I don't see anything too crazy going on there.

 

I don't think many threads should be locked. Also after the porn spam problem is fixed we should get rid of the many mods. It reminds me of large government thought control. Of course that may sound melodramatic, as there is no physical governing organization in this case, but the risk of ruining a diverse community is the part of the comparison that still stands.

[Richard]

The thing is that Rob wants a peaceful and calm community, and he isn't 100% sure of how to create that when there are people within the community who thrive on disagreements. I can't put words in his mouth, but as far as I am aware; he doesn't want to ban people, and he is happy for people to talk about any subject, but he wants people to respect each other and deal with each other without hostility. So when those kinds of threads come up where people clash, it is going against his mission for the forum. That's why moderators are stepping in when a thread seems to have run its course, moderators have tried to cool people off, yet people are still just getting madder and madder in there.

 

However, closing the thread only prevents them from expressing their anger in that thread, they will still have a problem with the posters they were arguing with, still have resentment. What some of you are saying is that if you leave these threads open, eventually people will work out their differences. I don't agree with that, I've never seen that happen, all that happens is that eventually someone makes the decision to stop posting. They don't change their mind, they just get sick of arguing and they cannot be bothered to carry on. I don't understand why that's a better conclusion, nobody is happy either way. I guess the difference is that the moderator gets the blame for their frustration, rather than just the people they were arguing with.

 

So I see the value in leaving a thread open to burn out, just because then the people involved just have themselves to blame. However, people can say some pretty horrible things sometimes, and again, Rob wants to reduce that as much as possible, and people sometimes don't take the hint.

 

Regarding the latest thread to be locked, I feel that the moderator who locked it should have posted an explanation beforehand. But it can always be unlocked by another moderator. We've got about 17 of them nobody has come to the rescue of that thread so far. I agree that we don't need this many mods now. Certainly, there is no so called "thought control" - mods are here to try to minimize personal attacks, to keep it friendly, not to control the subject matter of a debate.

 

What may happen is that Rob might have to accept that this is part of what an online community is, and that there will be arguments. I share his dislike of hostility, I don't see why people can't just debate, without attacking each other. You don't have to agree, but you can do it without the insults and stuff surely.

[xveganjoshx]

I guess the difference is that the moderator gets the blame for their frustration, rather than just the people they were arguing with.

 

So I see the value in leaving a thread open to burn out, just because then the people involved just have themselves to blame.

Interesting theory.

 

Certainly, there is no so called "thought control" - mods are here to try to minimize personal attacks, to keep it friendly, not to control the subject matter of a debate.

See, by choosing when to cut the thread off, and what content to allow, the moderators are in fact controlling the collective thought processes of the group.

 

What may happen is that Rob might have to accept that this is part of what an online community is, and that there will be arguments.

I think any realistic person will have to understand and appreciate the fact that not everyone agrees on an issue all the time.

 

I share his dislike of hostility, I don't see why people can't just debate, without attacking each other. You don't have to agree, but you can do it without the insults and stuff surely.

I agree.

[Richard]

See, by choosing when to cut the thread off, and what content to allow, the moderators are in fact controlling the collective thought processes of the group.

 

Well, I think the moderators should step in when it's no longer a thought process, and it's degraded into a fight. As I've said, moderators shouldn't be concerned with the views being expressed, they need to stop personal attacks. If the moderator has tried to cool people off, and has tried to get people to stop attacking each other - which doesn't mean that they should stop debating, just that they shouldn't be hostile about it - then if people ignore that and continue to attack one another, I can see the value in locking the thread.

 

I think any realistic person will have to understand and appreciate the fact that not everyone agrees on an issue all the time.

 

There isn't a problem with people disagreeing, there's a problem with them attacking each other.

 

I try to follow rob's guidelines for wanting a peaceful forum, if this were my own forum, I'd handle things differently, maybe it'd be even less popular! As it is, my approach is to try and get people to cool off and address their differences calmly. Or sometimes I don't do anything, just let things run their course as has been suggested. I've only ever locked 1 thread I think, due to repeated hostility within it, and deleted another thread because there wasn't anything in it apart from personal attacks. I don't interfere unless I think it's really necessary, and I do agree that people should be able to say what they like; and it would be ideal if people could work out their differences without a moderator having to stamp out the flames. But to keep the forum like Rob wants it, we run out of options sometimes

 

I remember when Rob first wanted me as a moderator, I told him I might not be able to do it, since I'm inclined to just let people do whatever they want on a forum and not interfere, since I don't think it's necessary. As it is, I generally don't do anything as a moderator, just now and then tell people to cool it.

 

Regarding the double standards thread, if it becomes unlocked, I don't know what people think will happen, a magical rainbow of love and joy is not going to sprout from there As I said before, I think the mod should have said why it got closed, and they could have waited a bit longer before doing so, because it had only just started to get ugly, but I understand the motivation, it was on my mind as well because I thought it was turning hostile

Edited May 9, 2008 by Richard

[Richard]

I felt so horrible when the thread I made about bee products became locked. I felt almost as if I caused the controversy when all I wanted was some insight as far as to why people behave certain ways and what led them to do so comfortably. I got those answers by asking the question and was very happy and now understand a lot more on the matter. Unfortunately it steamrolled into all sorts of outlashes and it seemed to get an offensive feel to it. I still feel bad I got my answer at the expense of hostility being generated. However, I wouldn't have known another side of the story unless I asked.

 

Sorry you felt that way dude, but it wasn't because of you that it got locked, as you say, it just got out of hand, like many honey topics do

[paragonx]

IMO - It wasn't really out of hand. People can have a difference of opinion and get heated about it. So what! I frequent some car racing forums, now those can get out of hand. You know what else? You can't delete your posts there. That way all are held accountable for what they say. If you need to change your mind you need to put in a new post to retract what you said or clarify your point of view instead of leaving holes in a thread.

 

*shrugs*