"Closed at OP's Request"

[FlynnCoyote]

1 minute ago, Zeke said:

Go fuck yourself.

Sure.

[Lucyfish]

Just now, Zeke said:

There's no fun in that and that's coddling.

It's plenty of fun!

I once modded a forum that required you give a short summary of who you are and your intentions for the forum when you registered, and you could totally deny them with a reply. It was fun to send things like "You sound like an assbandit, please stay in Tumblr"

[PastryOfApathy]

3 minutes ago, Lucyfish said:

Or

Or

You could just not let dicknoses join the site

;D

So what like an anteater or something?

[FlynnCoyote]

4 minutes ago, Lucyfish said:

Or

Or

You could just not let dicknoses join the site

;D

At whose discretion?

That takes a lot of liberty on the mods' part and it's kind of arrogant to think you'd make the cut.

[Sycophantic Feline]

4 minutes ago, Lucyfish said:

Or

Or

You could just not let dicknoses join the site

;D

That's unfair. Why should mods work to keep dicknoses out when most of them are dicknoses themselves?


Also @Battlechili , this is all your fault!

[Zeke]

4 minutes ago, Lucyfish said:

It's plenty of fun!

I once modded a forum that required you give a short summary of who you are and your intentions for the forum when you registered, and you could totally deny them with a reply. It was fun to send things like "You sound like an assbandit, please stay in Tumblr"

That's socialism.

[Lucyfish]

Everything is socialism now

You got a crunchwrap supreme from taco bell with chicken instead of beef? SOCIALIST

[PastryOfApathy]

Just now, Zeke said:

That's socialism.

Truly The hero America needs.

Just now, Lucyfish said:

Everything is socialism now

You got a crunchwrap supreme from taco bell with chicken instead of beef? SOCIALIST

It's Mexican, close enough.

[Saxon]

8 hours ago, Hakar-Kerarmor said:

I think it's a shitty thing that one person, who isn't even a moderator, can shut down a discussion many people might be interested in.

On the other hand, I'm sure there are arguments in esoteric corners of the internet, about pointless subjects, that I would still be having, if someone hadn't rescued me from feeling an obligation to reply to them. 

[PastryOfApathy]

4 hours ago, Saxon said:

On the other hand, I'm sure there are arguments in esoteric corners of the internet, about pointless subjects, that I would still be having, if someone hadn't rescued me from feeling an obligation to reply to them. 

Yeah, learning to walk away from stupid people on the internet really is one of life's most valuable skills.

[Ginpanther]

I don't have a program for tonight's show, so I can't tell at what policy Zeke has finally settled.

When it is settled, as well as socialized to and understood by the other mods, is this going to be posted to the rules or some formal announcement actually made? Policy shifts can be debated and agreed on in threads, but when they alter "expected functionality" it needs to be bubbled to the surface beyond the thread where it was finally decided upon.

[Zeke]

2 hours ago, Ginpanther said:

I don't have a program for tonight's show, so I can't tell at what policy Zeke has finally settled.

When it is settled, as well as socialized to and understood by the other mods, is this going to be posted to the rules or some formal announcement actually made? Policy shifts can be debated and agreed on in threads, but when they alter "expected functionality" it needs to be bubbled to the surface beyond the thread where it was finally decided upon.

[Guest]

Zeke, I'd tell you to walk away from the thread, but.. 

 

Anyways. I'm in support for basic control over my thread. I open it, I close it. Too fucking bad if there was 'conversation' or 'discussion'. If it gets to the point to where I want to close it, I should have the right to do so. Since that policy is staying, tough shit ya babies. 

God, seriously. Fuck OP for having a way to bow out, right? No matter your thoughts on Crystal, we should have that right as a user. 

[Clove Darkwave]

You know what also works?

 

Bans.

[Alias]

Keep thinking that.

[Vallium]

[screw mobile, redacted]

Edited January 3, 2016 by WolfNightV4X1

[FlynnCoyote]

2 hours ago, Lemon said:

Anyways. I'm in support for basic control over my thread. I open it, I close it. Too fucking bad if there was 'conversation' or 'discussion'. If it gets to the point to where I want to close it, I should have the right to do so. Since that policy is staying, tough shit ya babies. 

God, seriously. Fuck OP for having a way to bow out, right? No matter your thoughts on Crystal, we should have that right as a user. 

I disagree. And this isn't about Crystal, I honestly don't give two shits about her.

It's about how fucking rude it is to shut down a conversation out of what in many cases is proving to be little more than spite on part of the OP's. Granted that's not always the case, but the principle stands. Oh, you started the thread, that puts you in charge of it? Bullshit. Public forum, if you're done with the conversation you started than take your own advice and bow out.

You don't tell a circle of friends at a party to cease the conversation you started just because you're leaving the party. That discussion does not belong to you anymore. Your "rights" in this case are completely imaginary.

[DrDingo]

6 hours ago, FlynnCoyote said:

I disagree. And this isn't about Crystal, I honestly don't give two shits about her.

It's about how fucking rude it is to shut down a conversation out of what in many cases is proving to be little more than spite on part of the OP's. Granted that's not always the case, but the principle stands. Oh, you started the thread, that puts you in charge of it? Bullshit. Public forum, if you're done with the conversation you started than take your own advice and bow out.

You don't tell a circle of friends at a party to cease the conversation you started just because you're leaving the party. That discussion does not belong to you anymore. Your "rights" in this case are completely imaginary.

Conversation =/= Discussion.

Threads are for discussion. Private chats are for conversation. If you're on a thread, you talk about the topic given in the OP.

If you're just chatting on there, there's no point in the thread being open anymore because the whole point of the thread was lost somewhere down the line. 

[#00Buck]

Can you please close my bass fishing thread?

I don't think anyone here is worthy to discuss such a great outdoor pastime. 

Thanks. 

[Onnes]

Edited January 4, 2016 by Onnes
Updated image

[FlynnCoyote]

On 2/1/2016 at 7:34 AM, Zeke said:

Alright, here's what I am going to do:
If you ask to have your thread locked? I'll look at it and determine if it is necessary and discuss it with the others. If it is that junked up? It will be considered for closure.

Reports? Discretion and reviewed.  Reports with no reasons why you are reporting it will be disregarded and removed.

Derailments? Have fun. Screaming get back on topic was pointless, so that frees me up. Don't care.

If you make a thread, do so at your own risk. Stupid is as stupid does. 

 

Anything else? Tough shit and go fuck yourselves. Unless your thread has suddenly came down with a bad case of cancer, I ain't doing jack. :V

 

Sarcasm and casual insults aside, this is exactly how it needs to be.

[RTDragon]

19 hours ago, FlynnCoyote said:

I disagree. And this isn't about Crystal, I honestly don't give two shits about her.

It's about how fucking rude it is to shut down a conversation out of what in many cases is proving to be little more than spite on part of the OP's. Granted that's not always the case, but the principle stands. Oh, you started the thread, that puts you in charge of it? Bullshit. Public forum, if you're done with the conversation you started than take your own advice and bow out.

You don't tell a circle of friends at a party to cease the conversation you started just because you're leaving the party. That discussion does not belong to you anymore. Your "rights" in this case are completely imaginary.

OP why are you complaining about this considering that's how it's been handled on here. I don't see anything wrong with threads being closed by the original poster request. Considering how certain topics have derailed lately. It's better than it turning into something rather controversial.

Edited January 4, 2016 by RTDragon

[Vallium]

not only that but I dont see why its suddenly something to complain about, its not new or anything since its happened before. But now its "hey wait a minute this happened recently I dont like it".

If there are other awful things about this site why bring up new thing to bitch about?

[willow]

44 minutes ago, 6tails said:

con·ver·sa·tion

ˌkänvərˈsāSH(ə)n/

noun

noun: conversation; plural noun: conversations

1. the informal exchange of ideas by spoken words.

    

   dis·cus·sion

   dəˈskəSH(ə)n/

   noun

   noun: discussion

   1. the action or process of talking about something, typically in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas.

      "the proposals are not a blueprint but ideas for discussion"

      • a conversation or debate about a certain topic.

        plural noun: discussions

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

        Both being synonyms of each other means they take the same function or role and trying to make ANY distinction is utterly pointless.

a conversation or debate about a certain topic.

threads are generally for the discussion of a certain topic and while you're not going to get yelled at for being slightly off topic, there's a reason why mods tell you to get back on the topic of the thread if the discussion has strayed too off course. or if you're in a meeting, you're not having a conversation, you have an agenda with specific things you have to talk about and anything other discussion isn't allowed.

now if we're talking in a PM or a thread with no specific topic (i.e. General Time Waster, etc.) and we start off on one topic and switch to another, that's a conversation. we're just talking about things.

just because two words are synonyms doesn't mean they're always interchangeable.

[Vae]

I really think we need to separate people from the idea of "thread ownership" as a whole (with exceptions to like... personal projects and art threads and stuff),
because that concept is pretty fucking stupid and self-entitled, to begin with.

It's basically screeching out "NO. YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE THINGS I WANNA TALK ABOUT. YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG. GET OUT OF MY ROOM!",
when the thread should never have been considered a private space, to begin with.
Discussion topics are for discussion, not walling yourself off and letting people in by personal approval only. That's what fucking PMs and IM clients are for.

It's like toddler-tier bullshit.

If OP has lost their interest in the discussion currently taking place, they can easily either bring up more material about the original speaking point (maturely, without screaming about the other discussion happening) or quietly dip out of the thread.
It's really... not that difficult.

The most reasonable exceptions I can see to this are, as I mentioned before, art and personal project threads, and things of that nature, like commissions.
Because in those cases, there IS a sense of implied ownership on the OP's part.

Also excluding that are things that just devolve into repetitive insults of the OP / OP's family / etc.
Not necessarily because they should need mods to shield them, but just because it's redundant after a certain point.
 

Edited January 4, 2016 by Vae

[FlynnCoyote]

Vae has spoken my thoughts on the matter pretty much spot on. Unless the rules are being trampled, there's no grounds for putting a halt to a public discussion just because you're the one who started it.

It's just little things like this, poorly thought out policies by the old forum staff are going to see Phoenix suffer the same fall if they aren't brought up and addressed. I've been a senior moderator on a much larger and successful forum for years now, so pardon me if I think my ideas and/or opinions might be worth something on the matter. You pander too much to the userbase and they think they own you. Getting rid of this policy would be a step in the right direction and its one of the only thing about this site that has actually gotten on my nerves.

 

3 hours ago, WolfNightV4X1 said:

not only that but I dont see why its suddenly something to complain about, its not new or anything since its happened before. But now its "hey wait a minute this happened recently I dont like it".

If there are other awful things about this site why bring up new thing to bitch about?

Because this is a new site, there's no explicit need to keep the old one's policies. Especially shit ones.

3 hours ago, RTDragon said:

OP why are you complaining about this considering that's how it's been handled on here. I don't see anything wrong with threads being closed by the original poster request. Considering how certain topics have derailed lately. It's better than it turning into something rather controversial.

I just find it rude. Infantile. Much like how Vae described it. You disagree? Good for you.

[Vallium]

But thats just it though, "closed at OPs request" hardly happens, as stated before. When it usually does happen its of personal nature or derailment anyways. Most people who create threads leave it be, despite being their creators.

[RTDragon]

7 hours ago, FlynnCoyote said:

Vae has spoken my thoughts on the matter pretty much spot on. Unless the rules are being trampled, there's no grounds for putting a halt to a public discussion just because you're the one who started it.

It's just little things like this, poorly thought out policies by the old forum staff are going to see Phoenix suffer the same fall if they aren't brought up and addressed. I've been a senior moderator on a much larger and successful forum for years now, so pardon me if I think my ideas and/or opinions might be worth something on the matter. You pander too much to the userbase and they think they own you. Getting rid of this policy would be a step in the right direction and its one of the only thing about this site that has actually gotten on my nerves.

 

Because this is a new site, there's no explicit need to keep the old one's policies. Especially shit ones.

I just find it rude. Infantile. Much like how Vae described it. You disagree? Good for you.

Well deal with it OP you seem to be the type to bitch over minor things. Which something like this is no big deal to most people.

[FlynnCoyote]

37 minutes ago, RTDragon said:

Well deal with it OP you seem to be the type to bitch over minor things. Which something like this is no big deal to most people.

LOL

Then why are you here? Why have such a defensive and childish attitude towards someone just trying to put forward ideas to improve how the site is handled? And if you read the thread you know I'm not the only one who agrees with this idea. You know for things to get better they have to change right? Do you honestly think things will go better here than faf if you just run with the same rules? The same infantile allowances for users to close threads that aren't asspatting them anymore and the same fucking users exploiting the shit out of it? The same moderators who don't seem to give a shit and don't seem willing to take advice?

This is gonna be great.

 

 

[RTDragon]

1 minute ago, FlynnCoyote said:

LOL

Then why are you here? Why have such a defensive and childish attitude towards someone just trying to put forward ideas to improve how the site is handled? And if you read the thread you know I'm not the only one who agrees with this idea. You know for things to get better they have to change right? Do you honestly think things will go better here than faf if you just run with the same rules? The same infantile allowances for users to close threads that aren't asspatting them anymore and the same fucking users exploiting the shit out of it? The same moderators who don't seem to give a shit and don't seem willing to take advice?

This is gonna be great.

 

 

Sounds like you should be taking your own advice considering this thread you made seems to prove a point. You can't handle that people want to make their threads closed. If i recall the old FAF creative art thread users used to be able to close their own art threads. Till it got abused over people that can't handle critique.

[FlynnCoyote]

Just now, RTDragon said:

Sounds like you should be taking your own advice considering this thread you made seems to prove a point. You can't handle that people want to make their threads closed. If i recall the old FAF creative art thread users used to be able to close their own art threads. Till it got abused over people that can't handle critique.

Being allowed doesn't mean it's a good idea. And the fact that it has been abused in the past kind of shows that, no?

[Butters]

Do you ever read threads like this and think "what am I doing with my life?" This is honestly one of the most nickpicky and childish threads I've seen. 

I got hulu now, coulda been watching Scream Queens. 

[RTDragon]

Just now, FlynnCoyote said:

Being allowed doesn't mean it's a good idea. And the fact that it has been abused in the past kind of shows that, no?

And the moment you made a response toward my thread with LOL. proves to me you have no credibility what so ever in handling a civil discussion.

[Zeke]

2 hours ago, Butters said:

Do you ever read threads like this and think "what am I doing with my life?" This is honestly one of the most nickpicky and childish threads I've seen. 

I got hulu now, coulda been watching Scream Queens. 

Personally, there's some things to be taken from both sides here, both the for and against. But yes, it is nitpicky.

Yes, a user should have the right to request for their threads to be closed within reason, such as it has gone off the rail with the general topic, or reduced to insults and demeaning the OP. Conversations brought up in threads (A thread that talks about funerals somehow turns into a conversation about Religion), that can be either taken or created as another thread discussing religion and philosophy and why it stinks and people who follow jesus are hicks. As for General conversation, there's already a thread for that if people have forgotten. There's no need to create a separate thread for  small general stuff since we have one that's 81+ pages growing strong. Use it! Junk spammy shit? We also have the black hole for that as well for that sole purpose to post junk spammy shit. It's practically a "no man's land" for mods, so its barely even moderated...if not at all.

 So there are places and options open for people and it is up to the User(s) to take those options instead of nitpicking over another person's thread topic and why they asked someone to close it, and then blame the mods because you couldn't get in a last word. Options!

Like you've mentioned (and any others have) a person can decide to walk away. And as such, you also have the decision to take another route if one is closed to you, or not. 

I understand the dislike on this matter, and most likely it's not going to change.  Adjustments can be made, but not abolished because some find it too much like holding hands.

This will probably be the last time I am posting in this thread. So please take some consideration to come to a middle ground, or continue to complain. The choice is yours. 

[Guest]

"Come to a middle ground" means "Deal with it, its not changing.", PS. 

[Troj]

Acceptable:

*Asking for the thread to be closed after receiving a definitive answer to a factual or simple question. (Example: "Where can I buy purple fur?" "Purplefur.com." MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.)

*Asking for the thread to be closed because the discussion has become unproductive, toxic, or counterproductive. (Example: The thread is about a controversial political or social topic, and the discussion devolves into bigotry and flamewars. OR, the thread is about someone mourning the death of their pet goldfish, and devolves into people telling the OP that goldfish are stupid pets, and then debating which pets are the best.)

Unacceptable:

*Asking for a thread to be closed because you're merely bored with a debate or discussion.

*Asking for a thread to be closed because people disagreed with you and/or appropriately took you to task for something you said, did, or claimed.

 

 

[TrishaCat]

I would personally prefer that the OP of a thread have it within their ability to request that they be closed. Mainly because of:

On 1/2/2016 at 1:09 PM, Zeke said:

I am also reminded of the Paris thread as well-- That one was closed because it devolved into racist bullshit, and then re-opened at the request of the OP as long as it didn't turn into racist bullshit...then closed again when he requested it because it turned into racist bullshit.

 

On 1/2/2016 at 9:23 AM, MissFleece said:

If the thread has delved into a discussion unrelated to OP, or arguing, why don't you just open up a new thread and continue the discussion? 

 

On 1/2/2016 at 11:21 AM, WolfNightV4X1 said:

i actually like the "closed at OP's request" policy. Its somethingthey started, and if they wish they should be able to end it.

Some topics are even personal about the OP itself and the thread just devolves into argument and attacks, better to close it.

....and as someone who started a thread they'll likely be given the credit for its start, if they realized it was something to regret they should be able to close it.

Sounds like a decent policy to me. Dont like it, make another, move on...seems simple to me.

Especially WolfNight's in this case.

I also don't like the idea of being responsible for or inadvertently adding to discussion an OP in question does not want to incite. Its like being partly responsible for some great crime when you didn't intend to start the crime in the first place. Plus if a thread is about one thing, and it delves into something else when that wasn't what OP wanted, I think its doing a great disservice to the OP in question to continue to allow it to happen if that's not what they wanted. People can make their own threads if they want a different discussion, or continue a discussion through PM's and comments on profiles. Why is it necessary to allow people to continue to ruin someone's thread? And on another note since Crystal's threads were mentioned in this thread, should it not be okay for an OP to see a problem with their own posts and want it stopped? If someone is embaressed by a post they made or didn't realize what would happen when they posted it, is it not right that they at the very least be allowed an out to stop it? It seems like its adding insult to injury to not respect such requests.

And if we're going by specific sections of the forums, perhaps Black Hole shouldn't have anything closed for such a reason. However, I think its especially important that places like Rants and Raves allow OP to request their closure since they're generally much more personal threads to what each and every OP personally feels strongly about (be it a rant or a rave).

Also @Battlechili , this is all your fault!

I did not intend for this to happen, I assure you.

Edited January 4, 2016 by Battlechili

[FlynnCoyote]

4 hours ago, Butters said:

Do you ever read threads like this and think "what am I doing with my life?" This is honestly one of the most nickpicky and childish threads I've seen. 

I got hulu now, coulda been watching Scream Queens. 

I am so sorry. You have my permission to not read my threads in the future.

4 hours ago, RTDragon said:

And the moment you made a response toward my thread with LOL. proves to me you have no credibility what so ever in handling a civil discussion.

Hm, not it doesn't. Means your response was shit.

4 hours ago, Zeke said:

Personally, there's some things to be taken from both sides here, both the for and against. But yes, it is nitpicky.

Yes, a user should have the right to request for their threads to be closed within reason, such as it has gone off the rail with the general topic, or reduced to insults and demeaning the OP. Conversations brought up in threads (A thread that talks about funerals somehow turns into a conversation about Religion), that can be either taken or created as another thread discussing religion and philosophy and why it stinks and people who follow jesus are hicks. As for General conversation, there's already a thread for that if people have forgotten. There's no need to create a separate thread for  small general stuff since we have one that's 81+ pages growing strong. Use it! Junk spammy shit? We also have the black hole for that as well for that sole purpose to post junk spammy shit. It's practically a "no man's land" for mods, so its barely even moderated...if not at all.

 So there are places and options open for people and it is up to the User(s) to take those options instead of nitpicking over another person's thread topic and why they asked someone to close it, and then blame the mods because you couldn't get in a last word. Options!

Like you've mentioned (and any others have) a person can decide to walk away. And as such, you also have the decision to take another route if one is closed to you, or not. 

I understand the dislike on this matter, and most likely it's not going to change.  Adjustments can be made, but not abolished because some find it too much like holding hands.

This will probably be the last time I am posting in this thread. So please take some consideration to come to a middle ground, or continue to complain. The choice is yours. 

It ain't changing, tough shit?

 

[RTDragon]

13 minutes ago, FlynnCoyote said:

I am so sorry. You have my permission to not read my threads in the future.

Hm, not it doesn't. Means your response was shit.

It ain't changing, tough shit?

 

But your still nitpicking over a poster having a right to close their thread which in your little head is insulting to you. OP you can't even come back with something constructive if this is all your going to respond to.

[FlynnCoyote]

1 hour ago, RTDragon said:

But your still nitpicking over a poster having a right to close their thread which in your little head is insulting to you. OP you can't even come back with something constructive if this is all your going to respond to.

Yes? This whole thread was nitpicking. That doesn't make the idea any less valid. I put it forth, it was discussed, Zeke decided against. Now it's done and I've accepted that and begrudgingly moved on. You wanna see real nitpicking?

*You're

[Vae]

2 hours ago, RTDragon said:

But your still nitpicking over a poster having a right to close their thread which in your little head is insulting to you. OP you can't even come back with something constructive if this is all your going to respond to.

Wow, it's almost like the "Site Discussion" section is... you know... for discussing the site or something. :v

[RTDragon]

Well let's face it op has that right for their post to be closed even if it's not valid considering you usually have to think about a topic thread to post.

[Kinare]

Ya'll are spoiled rotten around here. On most forums, derailment from the main topic is an automatic thread lock (sometimes even warnings given to the derailers), regardless of if OP wants it or not. You should be happy you get to derail most threads with the exception of a few rare ones without consequence.

[Troj]

^^^^This is true.

Hell, on SomethingAwful, mods can even probate you for being "unfunny" or "annoying" or for invoking a dead meme, and one time, they probated everyone who had contributed to a "stupid" derailing side-topic in a thread, including those who had contributed prior to the official "cut that shit out" warning.

Edited January 5, 2016 by Troj

[RTDragon]

32 minutes ago, Troj said:

^^^^This is true.

Hell, on SomethingAwful, mods can even probate you for being "unfunny" or "annoying" or for invoking a dead meme, and one time, they probated everyone who had contributed to a "stupid" derailing side-topic in a thread, including those who had contributed prior to the official "cut that shit out" warning.

But you also have to remember they're very strict and you have to pay $10 to register on their forums and from reading those rules they made it pretty clear.

[Troj]

Yep, that's true, too--you pay to play, and they can't say they don't warn people.

 

Edited January 5, 2016 by Troj

[TrishaCat]

52 minutes ago, Troj said:

^^^^This is true.

Hell, on SomethingAwful, mods can even probate you for being "unfunny" or "annoying" or for invoking a dead meme, and one time, they probated everyone who had contributed to a "stupid" derailing side-topic in a thread, including those who had contributed prior to the official "cut that shit out" warning.

SA confuses me.

If you look at its history, it seemed to be synonymous with 4chan-like posting and was filled with a lot of silly dumb joking things poking fun at people in the world and just in-general lots of shitposting. But nowadays all I hear is how strict it is and how it seems to be a no fun allowed zone. Did it change or do I just have a poor understanding of what it is and/or used to be?

[Troj]

First, it depends on the forum, since there are many, many forums, and each has its own rules. Some forums are more easygoing, and some are less so. Some forums put pressure on members to be hilarious according to local standards, and some do not.

Second, I'd say some of the forums have changed over the years, and some people naturally experience these changes as SA becoming more strict, less strict, less fun, or less funny. One of the forums in particular used to be semi-coherent, and now it's one of three free-for-all-type forums, and people have lots of theories on why that is.

Lots of people are saying it's jumped the shark in general. I rarely visit it these days.

[diretractor]

1 hour ago, Kinare said:

Ya'll are spoiled rotten around here. On most forums, derailment from the main topic is an automatic thread lock.

This is very true.

I don't think the thread was locked just because the OP asked for it.

I was watching FAF before Phoenix happened. I have some idea about what it was like. I don't understand the argument of removing a policy that would allow the kind of behavior I saw in that thread to continue would somehow make Phoenix less like FAF, because what I saw was the thread becoming more like FAF.

[Spot]

Solution: create a thread about the thread and continue the discussion.