Were the locking P&WA threads necessary?

[jduster]

And ironically, this one can be locked too, by your discretion.

But is it sufficient to lock a thread just because a mod does not like it or a mod feels its been discussed too much to their liking. If it is because of flaming, then it should only affect the specific users.

 

[Evo]

And ironically, this one can be locked too, by your discretion.

But is it sufficient to lock a thread just because a mod does not like it or a mod feels its been discussed too much to their liking. If it is because of flaming, then it should only affect the specific users.

They are usually locked based on the number of member complaints, as the recent ones were.

 

[russ_watters]

But is it sufficient to lock a thread just because a mod does not like...

Of course, that is what makes moderators moderators. We do take into account the desires of the users, but the moderators make the call.

If it is because of flaming, then it should only affect the specific users.

We try, but sometimes a thread has just too low of a signal to noise ratio to be worth the effort to try and salvage. It takes a lot of work to go through a thread and clean it up.

 

[ThomasT]

But is it sufficient to lock a thread just because a mod does not like it or a mod feels its been discussed too much to their liking. If it is because of flaming, then it should only affect the specific users.

Don't worry over why a thread was locked. If there's something you want to discuss wrt a particular topic, then just start a thread on it. If you wanted to contribute to a thread that was locked, then don't start a new thread on exactly the same topic. Change it a bit. There's only a very few topics that are actually prohibited, and they're only prohibited because the discussions wrt those topics have resulted in emotional, rather than factual and reasonable, posts.

So, if you've got an opinion about something that you want to discuss, and if that opinion is based on verifiable sources, then post your opinion and the basis for your opinion. No problem.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

We try, but sometimes a thread has just too low of a signal to noise ratio to be worth the effort to try and salvage. It takes a lot of work to go through a thread and clean it up.

This is a big problem IMO when it comes to threads that have gotten off track. Often members prefer to jump in and argue with "flamers" meaning that by the time a mentor takes a look dozens of posts have been posted going back and forth. On top of that if we do go through and delete a bunch of posts we usually get criticised for it damned if we do, damned if we don't.

 

[ZapperZ]

And ironically, this one can be locked too, by your discretion.

But is it sufficient to lock a thread just because a mod does not like it or a mod feels its been discussed too much to their liking. If it is because of flaming, then it should only affect the specific users.

Just in case you are not aware of this, the overwhelming majority of the time, when a thread is locked, or about to be locked, the issue is typically discussed with the rest of the Mentors! Very seldom is such a thing done or decided by just one Mentor. So your assertion that it done just because "a mod does not like it" is patently false. No Mentor or Moderator on PF can run the forum to his or her sole discretion.

Secondly, if flaming occurs, and no one does anything about it, then all of you were part of tolerating the violation of the Rules that all of you had agreed to. The FATE of a thread lies entirely on your shoulders! If you CARE enough about the discussion and want to see it continue, then you should care enough to report it if it goes astray. If not, then you should suffer the consequences of not having the privilege (and it IS a privilege) of having such a discussion. If you participate, then you are no longer an innocent bystander.

Zz.