should deja vu posts be locked?
I vote no. Saying "there can be only one conversation about bagels" doesn't make any sense.
When somebody asks a question that's been addressed before, it's good to point out the old threads, but locking is a bit extreme.
Why don't we save locking for the out-of-control flame war threads?
When somebody asks a question that's been addressed before, it's good to point out the old threads, but locking is a bit extreme.
Why don't we save locking for the out-of-control flame war threads?
Comments
-
Subject: Re: should deja vu posts be locked?
dailyheights wrote: I vote no. Saying "there can be only one conversation about bagels" doesn't make any sense.
exactly, it's especially frustrating for new members that don't know the lay of the forum yet, but have to search through old threads for relevant info. So many places close and open within weeks that many posts can be outdated and need to be changed.
It's good to point out the old threads, but why don't we save locking for the out-of-control flame war threads?[/img] -
I don't care what you decide, but I think it's a decision for the admin and mods to make. you can request feedback - that's all nice. but what I really want, as a user, are GUIDELINES. you can write something relatively vague and relatively short that gives the mods the "authority" to deal with trolls and ooc users while giving new and old users a place to go when they need guidance as to what or what is not appropriate. it also provides backup when either a mod takes action or a user is upset about a mod's action.
you know, bill of rights, etc. -
Subject: Re: should deja vu posts be locked?
amyskittysitting wrote: exactly, it's especially frustrating for new members that don't know the lay of the forum yet, but have to search through old threads for relevant info. So many places close and open within weeks that many posts can be outdated and need to be changed.
It's not like old threads can't be added to. Once they're bumped, people can come back and revise their opinions if they have to. I don't really see how "I want to be lazy and not bother to look" is a better or worse explanation than "there can be only one!" If anything, I think our reactions to done before threads isn't so bad. I've been wandering around Televisionwithoutpity.com for years. Those mods can be really evil.
Also, I think this poll is missing an option: delete duplicates! :twisted: Just kidding.
ETA: As far as guidelines go, I think people should follow the "in real life" rule. Like the over the line comment that pretty much set off crap and got the transplants thread locked for the weekend. Take some time and think: "if I said that in real life, would I be pretty likely to get punched in the face?" If the answer is yes, don't do it. Or "if I ran into this random audience of lurkers in real life, would I be creeped out if they knew me instantly because of my on board oversharing?" If the answer is yes, don't do it. And shit, just be nice and neighborly or whatever. -
Don't mods have the power to move posts to another thread? I guess this would sort of be the opposite of "splitting" a thread. I agree that the locking thing can be a bit jarring, but there's also value in having one ongoing bagel discussion that people can continue to add to. How about rather than locking a new bagel thread, just move the posts in the new thread to the old thread. Is this possible? Look at how annoying it must have been for Emily to dig up links to all the old laundry discussions. It would have been better if they had been pooled.
-
Carnivore wrote: Don't mods have the power to move posts to another thread? I guess this would sort of be the opposite of "splitting" a thread. I agree that the locking thing can be a bit jarring, but there's also value in having one ongoing bagel discussion that people can continue to add to. How about rather than locking a new bagel thread, just move the posts in the new thread to the old thread. Is this possible? Look at how annoying it must have been for Emily to dig up links to all the old laundry discussions. It would have been better if they had been pooled.
You know, I've been trying to tinker and figure that out, but I just think it can not be done. Which is annoying. :? -
Individual posts can't be moved, and yes, it's pretty annoying to dig up old threads when people could do it themselves with a one-word keyword search!
Personally, I think locking is only needed when it's a general topic that has come up again and again and again. Like laundry and/or dry-cleaning, or particular restaurants that already have a thread devoted to them. Like is somebody had something new to say about Tavern on Dean, okay, new thread. But if somebody posted "Hey, what do people think about ToD?" it would make sense to me to point them to the old thread and lock the new one because they really could have answered their question with a search. If they bumped the old thread, they'd be sure to get some additional opinions posted, too.
I've always been in favor of having a sticky at the top that says (in summary): "Be nice, no ad hominem/straw man attacks, people don't take kindly to wild generalizations you might make about them, please search before posting new topics about really general subjects, don't make commercial postings outside the classified area." I don't think it would have to be that complicated. -
Lock, no. Point in the right direction, yes.
-
alafairnadia wrote: I don't care what you decide, but I think it's a decision for the admin and mods to make. you can request feedback - that's all nice. but what I really want, as a user, are GUIDELINES. you can write something relatively vague and relatively short that gives the mods the "authority" to deal with trolls and ooc users while giving new and old users a place to go when they need guidance as to what or what is not appropriate. it also provides backup when either a mod takes action or a user is upset about a mod's action.
amen.
you know, bill of rights, etc.
(and I too want a Delete Redundant Threads voting option . . . :evil: ) -
I'm all for locking (maybe even deleting) once the original poster has been advised how to find the information s/he is looking for. Doesn't the redundancy eat up server space? Great if you have the room for it, but why not put that towards offering other features on the site (i.e. DH store) or off-shoot blogs (this was discussed at some point IIRC). On another board that I used to frequent, the admin did a major spring cleaning once a year, deleting members and threads that had seen no activity in the past year. I don't expect that to happen here, but I do think even better use of resources could be made.
-
bewitched wrote: Doesn't the redundancy eat up server space?
Actually, it's all these new user accounts that are killing us... I'm going to start by deleting the accounts of people who disagree with me.
:Internet Smiley Face: -
On a serious note, what is the benefit of locking "redundant" threads? Don't these threads pretty much lock themselves after somebody posts the link to the previous discussion?
The standard behavior is that they tend to float down to the bottom of the pile and into obscurity pretty quickly. Correct me if you've ever seen otherwise.
Let's just let the market take care of itself... be all lassez faire... you know, Allen Greenspan and Milton Friedman... all those guys...
End of discussion? -
dailyheights wrote: End of discussion?
No. You haven't addressed guidelines. Your view? -
I think my position on locking threads is pretty clear. Or do you mean what's at the top of the page now?
-
dailyheights wrote: I think my position on locking threads is pretty clear. Or do you mean what's at the top of the page now?
I'm talking about the larger issue of updating the FAQ, including issues of post-locking and deletion of posts by trolls or for other reasons. -
OK. How's this:
Be nice or leave.
No ad hominem/straw man attacks.
People don't take kindly to wild generalizations you might make about them.
Please search before posting new topics about really general subjects.
Don't make commercial postings outside the classified area.
The moderators can delete your post for any reason, for any cause.
If your post gets deleted, it's not a First Amendment issue. It's probably an issue about you being a jerk.
What else? -
I think I would just elaborate a little:
Be nice or leave.
No ad hominem/straw man attacks.
People don't take kindly to wild generalizations you might make about them. Hang around and get to know people before posting your manifesto about what is wrong with [insert name of group/place/thing].
Please search before posting new topics about really general subjects. There are already many threads about dry-cleaners and restaurants, the answer you need might already be there. ETA: You can add your comments to an old thread.
Don't make commercial postings outside the classified area. If you're not sure where your post goes, PM one of the mods to ask.
Don't post things in every forum. Most users look at all the forums and will get annoyed if they see your post again and again.
The moderators can delete your post for any reason, for any cause, but they will likely contact you by PM first.
If your post gets deleted, it's not a First Amendment issue. It's probably an issue about you being a jerk. ETA: This board is privately run and the admin is not obliged to let anyone use it. -
Here are the rules from another forum I go to regularly:
"Welcome to the XXXX forum. Use of the forum is open to all XXXX registered users. The Forum is provided as an opportunity for members to discuss cigars and related topics.
The basic rule for using the Forum is that you use good judgment and common sense in keeping your comments and messages reasonable. Some examples of unreasonable messages may include the use of profanity, advertising or commercial purposes, competing web sites, or disparaging an individual, a race or religion, a company, or website. In the event that certain Forum postings are questionable, the posting will be taken down, and offenders may have their privileges removed. This message area is monitored by our staff, who reserve the right to remove, edit or close a post or thread at any time. However, it is impossible to review every message, and while we will make every effort to remove objectionable material right away, by using the forum you acknowledge that all posts are the express opinions of the authors only. Therefore, in no way will XXXX or its administrators or staff be held liable for any post. The IP address of all posts is recorded to assist in enforcing these terms and conditions.
By entering you agree to be bound by these conditions.
Thank you! " -
EmilyM - I like your list. that's what I've been wishing for. I realize it's what a lot of internet users already know, but it needs to be said and posted. It gives folk a reference when they get on the board and/or get upset about something. Also, it gives a framework for posting for those who bear no internal framework.
-
We have a classified section - why not a neighborhood attaction/review section? Then you can move all the "Where is the best place for . . ." or "Went to ....... restaurant and it was good/bad", etc.
PS I also agree with posting some guidelines -
should allow to post.
-
EmilyM wrote:
i would make a SLIGHT modification to say:
The moderators can delete your post for any reason, for any cause, but they will likely contact you by PM first.
...but they will likely contact you by PM explaining why.
just because sometimes it makes more sense to contact them after, depending on the situation. -
armchair_warrior wrote: should allow to post.
That's not the question. -
More:
Don't overpost. Be judicious. Use PM and e-mail whenever appropriate. -
Should deja vu threads be locked? no, they shouldnt be lock, they should be allowed. if thats more clearer.
-
Locking redundant threads adds to the general vibe of unfriendliness. It can be daunting enough for a new person to make a post, but when a mod gruffly locks the thread, acting like a duplicate thread is an actual burden on anyone's life, I would imagine the newbie would be even less interested in participating more in the future.
-
i think that some of the info changes too. So from time to time, having a new person ask about where they might find good bagels might remind people:
"Oh Yeah! I had those great bagels from that new place last week" and share the info.
I am all for sharing...especially if it would be a new good coffee place close by that I don't know about!
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 40K All Categories
- 27.1K Neighborhoods
- 5.1K Crown Heights/Prospect Lefferts Gardens
- 7.1K Prospect Heights
- 2.3K Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy
- 8K Park Slope
- 549 Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
- 442 Flatbush/Midwood/Ditmas Park
- 657 BoCoCa (Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens)
- 151 Red Hook
- 104 Gowanus
- 304 Bay Ridge/Bensonhurst
- 130 Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay
- 270 Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO and Downtown
- 598 Windsor Terrace / Kensington
- 673 Greenwood Heights and Sunset Park
- 749 Brooklyn and Beyond
- 6.3K Stuff
- 86 Brooklyn Back When
- 1.2K Brooklyn Pets
- 257 Brooklyn Kids
- 241 Brooklyn Eats
- 51 Brooklyn Booze
- 3.6K The Lounge / Random Stuff
- 611 Brooklyn Politics
- 122 Brooklyn Sports and Fitness
- 111 Brooklyn Photos
- 339 Site Issues
- 8 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- 6.2K Listings
- 1.1K APARTMENTS and REAL ESTATE
- 1.3K Sales Openings Events
- 2.3K The Classifieds