This is a really tough topic. I have not read the post in question but I will say, in general, we will have just as many people complaining because we do not close some threads quickly enough. Damned if you do and Damned if you don't. There is a fine line there and I haven't found it yet. Most of the time I couldn't even tell you who made me close a thread. I try not to let personalities get involved. Originally Posted by chipperI find this to be a great response to the subject matter.
Ok, to get this train wreck of a thread back on track, Sixx asked a question: Why was Tony's latest theAd closed as soon as it was opened by the mods?POW BISHES!!!!
Answer:
1. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=258658 - closed
2. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=246911 - open
3. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=249271 - closed but allowed to run it's course with a final post by a mod explaining everything.
4. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=210919 - open
These threads are particularly good as he insults the very mods in control of his being reinstated.
5. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=230224 - open despite the insulting of the chat mods
6. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=227056 - open and again with an explanation from a chat mod as to why he was banned
His threads asking why he was banned, seems he was told why.
7. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=187888 - closed but also allowed to run with responses by both an owner and chat mod
8. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=185821 - open
9. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=185816 - open
Ok, all the above threAds have the same basic topic, Tony being banned from chat. Out of the 9 threads 6 are still currently open, I agree with the mods, there really was no need for a 10th thread on the subject. While there is no direct rule in the forum guidelines, it's pretty well known that action will be taken against spam on most any site.
So there you have it Sixx, your answer, or shall I dig up threads from when you were an Austin mod to show how you as a mod steered threads along for your own amusement and fodder? Or your threAds whining about your current ban in chat showing your true reasons for joining in on this? Done in another thread of course since it's not the subject of this thread. Originally Posted by novacain
Sixx,I only responded to her shot. I should not have done that. My bad. I am always one to call myself out. So yup, I should not have kept it going. It stopped so its all good.
Your second post on this thread called Ze a "tard", but now you want to get holier than thou and bitch about people taking "pot shots"?
Also, there is a marked difference between passive aggressiveness (see your posts bitching about Bubba prematurely closing this thread) and cleverness. I'd try and explain it, but judging on how literally you took POD's humor, it'd be a lost cause. Originally Posted by TheBizz
The complaint there was that it was too "wild west" if you will. Kind of like this thread. People who don't agree with the OP take their shots, etc and take things off topic.Confirmation bias, perhaps? We all tend to believe that most others share our opinions about how tight or loose moderation should be. Your assumption about "most" people and "we all can agree" is not necessarily accurate.
I think we can all agree that if given a choice of either A. the board being too tightly moderated or B. A "looser" approach, most would opt for B. especially this group that tried to take this off topic and/or with personal insults.
This thread was meant to stimulate conversation. In reality, isn't that the meaning of anything posted on this board? Originally Posted by sixxbach