Is it good business to have...

moderators closing threads when THEY think it is a good time to do so?

I can see if many people are starting to complain about a thread, but it sure seems that a certain moderator in a certain forum sure likes his job maybe a bit too much!

Now, I don't run this place, but for those that do, I have to admit that having a moderator closing threads doesn't make me think that this place is about free thinking. Nothing good comes of closing down conversation, even if sometimes things get a bit off topic, threads have a way of getting back too the topic given time.

Also, I don't think that a bit of controversy hurts the site! Heavily moderated sites tend to die off quickly.

Maybe try banning members for 2-7 days if they get a bit out of line. I have seen that work much better in other forums.

[mick]

Moderator \Mod"er*a`tor\, n. [L.: cf. F. mod['e]rateur.]
1. One who, or that which, moderates, restrains, or pacifies.
--Sir W. Raleigh.
[1913 Webster]

Moderate \Mod"er*ate\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Moderated; p. pr. &
vb. n. Moderating.]
1. To restrain from excess of any kind; to reduce from a
state of violence, intensity, or excess; to keep within
bounds; to make temperate; to lessen; to allay; to
repress; to temper; to qualify; as, to moderate rage,
action, desires, etc.; to moderate heat or wind.
[1913 Webster]

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rei

Is it good business to have moderators closing threads when THEY think it is a good time to do so?

Imo, it sureasheck is. The moderators are only following the direction of the site owner, not their own personal standards. The people moderating this site bend over backwards sometime to ensure that all posters are treated fairly, no matter how aggravating they might be to them personally. They do a heckuva fine job; this site would be McGriffs redux without them.

And I say that having had a ton of my own posts deleted over the years. I may have disagreed with them a few times but I certainly can't fault their over-all judgment.

One opinion so far.

Anybody else?

[mbyron]

I agree with JR. Indeed, the tendency of some posters to post erroneous or misleading info even after having been corrected (with citations) is one the moderators could do even more to curb.

Since this board is privately owned, such moderating is not a "free speech" issue. And although I agree with the general point that more "opinions" can foster understanding, obviously incorrect points of view offered by "trolls" are not valuable to that end.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by rei

Is it good business to have moderators closing threads when THEY think it is a good time to do so?

Not to be a smart-@ss, but when else do you think they should close a thread? Why give them the ability to moderate if they're not supposed to use it until they get the say-so from somebody else? Of course they should do it when they think it should be closed.

I can see if many people are starting to complain about a thread, but it sure seems that a certain moderator in a certain forum sure likes his job maybe a bit too much!

I don't know who you're talking about, but I think the fact that this thread is still here shows that you're over-reacting.

Now, I don't run this place, but for those that do, I have to admit that having a moderator closing threads doesn't make me think that this place is about free thinking.

That's because this place isn't about free thinking. It's about making money for the people who own it. We get the benefit of using it to express ourselves within the boundaries that they give us. If we don't like the boundaries, we can always move over to the NFHS site.

Nothing good comes of closing down conversation,

I disagree. There are threads I've seen that have devolved to despicable levels, including mocking Special Olympians and even comments about my own deceased mother. Sometimes you just have to shut it down.

Also, I don't think that a bit of controversy hurts the site! Heavily moderated sites tend to die off quickly.

There's a difference between controversy (which we have plenty of) and lack of civility (which we can do without).

Maybe try banning members for 2-7 days if they get a bit out of line. I have seen that work much better in other forums.

It's been tried here too. I don't know if it has worked or not. However, I agree with mbyron in that there are certain posters who I think should be moderated even more strictly than they are; but the mods bend over backwards not to pick on him.

Again, I think you're probably over-reacting a bit.

[bpowlen]

[QUOTE=rei]

moderators closing threads when THEY think it is a good time to do so?

um, yes, that's what moderators are for. Would you like them to take a poll first?

Now, I don't run this place,

I, for one, am glad about that.

I have to admit that having a moderator closing threads doesn't make me think that this place is about free thinking.

This is a sports forum if you want a free thinking forum, try this:
ghanaconscious.ghanathink.org/forum

Nothing good comes of closing down conversation, even if sometimes things get a bit off topic, threads have a way of getting back too the topic given time.

Some conversations need to end at the forum and be picked back up at the bar.
I don't know anything about the site restrictions, but I doubt there is one that has unlimited space, they have to cut things off when they get seriously off topic.

I'm new here, but I'm glad it is being monitored, not all of them are, and it's very difficult to find anything useful on those that are simply unorganized "free thinking" babble fests.

Kudos to the Moderators!
~b

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I don't know who you're talking about, but I think the fact that this thread is still here shows that you're over-reacting.

Again, I think you're probably over-reacting a bit.

You seem very obsessed with me "over-reacting".

I am simply stating my opinion on the matter. It doesn't bode with what you think so I am now "over-reacting"? In my mind, I am not over-reacting, I am simply making observations of events I have witnessed and giving my opinion about how they work in the grand scheme of things.

I appreciated your other comments, but maybe statements like this show that many people provoke confrontations unwittingly. It seems that often, confrontations are the results of deceptively "sane" posts that actually take on the tone of accusations towards people.

Think that over.

When I coach comes out all excited about a call you just make, do you say "Coach, settle down. You are over-reacting"?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by rei

You seem very obsessed with me "over-reacting".

"Very obsessed"? I said it twice. Once as an observation, and once in conclusion. If that makes me obsessed, so be it.

I am simply stating my opinion on the matter.

That's cool. I thought I was doing the same thing.

In my mind, I am not over-reacting, I am simply making observations of events I have witnessed and giving my opinion about how they work in the grand scheme of things.

I was not attacking or obsessing. I was simply making an observation of events I witnessed (your post, which seemed to be complaining about over-reaching moderators) and gave my opinion about them (it seemed to me that you perhaps made a bigger deal of the situation than I would have). I wouldn't be so bold as to surmise how they work in the grand scheme of things.

maybe statements like this show that many people provoke confrontations unwittingly.

Maybe it shows that people get defensive when they are challenged by people that they don't know. I'm not saying that's what happened, it's just a possibility to consider.

It seems that often, confrontations are the results of deceptively "sane" posts that actually take on the tone of accusations towards people.

I honestly don't see a confrontation here. But your point is sometimes true here in cyberspace. You can't read a person's tone from a typed post and if you don't know the person, you are less willing to give him/her the benefit of the doubt.

Think that over.

Right back at ya.

When I coach comes out all excited about a call you just make, do you say "Coach, settle down. You are over-reacting"?

No. I say, "This is my first game, Coach. So relax, it isn't going to get any better."

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rei

It seems that often, confrontations are the results of deceptively "sane" posts that actually take on the tone of accusations towards people.

Think that over.

Which was obviously your intent in starting this thread......

Think that over.

It seems like the response(and lack thereof) to date in this thread range from complete apathy to disagreement with you. No one else seems to think that the big, bad moderator guys are destroying everyone's right to free speech. That should tell you something also. You seem to be the only one who is "very obsessed".

Bob and Mick should be issued medals for having to put up with some of the dickheads that post here. And yes, that certainly has included me at times too.

[Welpe]

I've moderated forums before and it is a PITA. I think Bob and Mick do a good job, heck I even think they are a bit lenient sometimes.

In my experience, it is rarely a good thing to let a thread spiral out of control.

[JugglingReferee]

The mods do a fantastic job. I'm with JR.

[tjones1]

I think they are doing great.

I've been here since 2004. Nothing has changed since I joined (except for the design of the board ) and the site is still running and bringing in new members.

I would certainly agree that without them, this board would be a cluster and probably wouldn't even be around, which would be a damn shame considering how much I've learned since I've been here.

So, kudos to our mods!