Is this justification for closing a thread???

[TheDag]

I recently saw a thread closed with the reason given that it was an old discussion which had been bumped and it had been moved from a different section. Is that really justification to close an active discussion?

[TheDag]

repost of original article

I recently saw a thread closed with the reason given that it was an old discussion which had been bumped and it had been moved from a different section. Is that really justification to close an active discussion?


This really seems to be a poor reason for closing disccusions. I mean there are other discussions that have been going even longer that have not been shut down. Does it have anything to do with it being a discussion about sex I wonder?

I would like to see staff justify shutting a discussion for those reasons. If there was some violation of the rules fine but why would that not be mentioned? It seems as if someone just didn't want the discussion anymore.

[Lindon Tinuviel]

It depends on how old it was. Resurrecting a zombie thread from long ago isn't always a good idea, since people often don't check the dates. Posters who haven't been around the board in months or even years get quoted, answered, questioned, and occassionally reported or flamed for something that was said way back when.

[TheDag]

The thread I have in mind has not been dug up. It has been going with no more than a weeks gap between any two posts for five months. The thread was moved into the womens section and one poster did tell a guy to get out as it was a womens discussion. So your right in that some may not have realised it originally started in a section where guys could comment. When the thread was moved I pointed out it had been moved to a section where people who were participating could no longer participate. I was promised that they would get back to me but they never did about that. It still doesn't seem like a good enough reason to close the thread especially when forum rules state that you should not start a new discussion if there is already one.

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Not knowing the nature of the thread, I can only contribute a hearty "bug 'em til you get an answer... then bug 'em some more until you get a better answer."

[Auntie]

I got notice today of an old thread of mine that was just now closed. I wondered why the heck staff took the time to look up an old dead thread of mine, just to close it. My only conclusion is staff is bored to tears and has nothing better to do than to find old dead threads and close them.

What else could it be.:o

[TheDag]

the thread in question is about christians and oral sex. There have been no posts in there recently that would justify closing the thread for vulgarity reasons. Recently it has been friendly discussion on if it is ok or not. There were some posters that in my opinion needed an attitude adjustment in regards to their posts but that was ages ago.

[bubblefish]

Have you contacted the mod who removed the thread, or their admins? They should be able to give you an answer as to why it was closed.

[TheDag]

Have you contacted the mod who removed the thread, or their admins? They should be able to give you an answer as to why it was closed.
The reason for the thread closure was given in the thread and I mentioned them in my OP of this thread. If there are other reasons that would mean they are deliberately deceiving people. Very dangerous ground. The question here is if the reasons they gave are justifiable. I will see if I can contact the admin in charge of the team the person is from all the same.


Edit to add: I had a look to see who the admins are for the team the mod is in. It lists you as being one of the admins for the ministry team unless the listing is very hard to understand.

[bubblefish]

:doh: Sorry, I missed the part where you mentioned the forum it was in. I really need to slow down when reading ;)

Let me look into it and I will get back to you. I can't really comment without knowing the details.

[Crazy Liz]

Since this is about a specific thread, how about posting a link to it?

[TheDag]

Just in case the link is needed it is
http://christianforums.com/t5759028-christians-and-oral-sex.html&page=7&highlight=christians+oral+sex


Although there was a thread mentioned by another post here in post #5 which I am not aware of. Maybe if you want an answer auntie you could post a link here as well.

Edit to add: I did also send a pm to the mod who closed the thread which was shaslove letting her know I had asked this question and invited her to give an explanation. I did point out that I am not on a witchhunt or anything but just curious to see if this is new procedure or something. There are reasons that they may have wanted to close the thread that I can think of but they were not the reasons given.

[CaDan]

CL's post will soon be gone, but the gist was that the thread was closed for unspecified reasons unrelated to its subject.

We need to do a better job explaining our actions.

[sinneD]

No actually, what we need to do is follow the forum rules, which specifically prohibit discussing Staff actions in public posts AND also which prohibit posting a Private Message from one member to another without the other persons permission.

Both of these are in violations of forum rules

[Crazy Liz]

No actually, what we need to do is follow the forum rules, which specifically prohibit discussing Staff actions in public posts AND also which prohibit posting a Private Message from one member to another without the other persons permission.

Both of these are in violations of forum rules
So we're back to rules requiring cover-ups?

[Crazy Liz]

Have you contacted the mod who removed the thread, or their admins? They should be able to give you an answer as to why it was closed.

:doh: Sorry, I missed the part where you mentioned the forum it was in. I really need to slow down when reading ;)

Let me look into it and I will get back to you. I can't really comment without knowing the details.

Can you tell us?

Your mod says he isn't allowed to.

[Crazy Liz]

I agree it's in the public interest.

Admin: "Ask the mod or their admin. They should be able to tell you the reason."

Mod: "I am forbidden to tell you the reason."

Admin: ~silence~

Mod: "You shouldn't talk about what I wouldn't tell you."

Admin: ~silence~

What's wrong with this picture?

[CaDan]

I agree it's in the public interest.

Admin: "Ask the mod or their admin. They should be able to tell you the reason."

Mod: "I am forbidden to tell you the reason."

Admin: ~silence~

Mod: "You shouldn't talk about what I wouldn't tell you."

Admin: ~silence~

What's wrong with this picture?

Lots.

[Lindon Tinuviel]

IMO, what's wrong is what's wrong everywhere--people who support bad practices because it's in their best interests to do so.

[CaDan]

IMO, what's wrong is what's wrong everywhere--people who support bad practices because it's in their best interests to do so.

No. You are assuming things make sense. Bad practices are not kept only because they are in somebody's best interest. Bad practices stick around because of inertia, mostly.

[Crazy Liz]

No. You are assuming things make sense. Bad practices are not kept only because they are in somebody's best interest. Bad practices stick around because of inertia, mostly.
How can we overcome that inertia?

[Lindon Tinuviel]

No. You are assuming things make sense. Bad practices are not kept only because they are in somebody's best interest. Bad practices stick around because of inertia, mostly.

I dunno... the shrillness of the whole Talking About Mod Actions Is AGAINST THE RULES thing has me wondering. Maybe some people prefer not being questioned. If so, that's not inertia--that's self-absorbed human beings with inflated senses of their own importance.

[CaDan]

How can we overcome that inertia?

chaoschristian had some posts, oh, maybe a year back or so at the Board That Dare Not Speak Its Name regarding this. Mostly it involves specifying a vision and then evaluating rules and practices in light of that vision.

[bubblefish]

SinneD is right in what he said to an extent. We can not discuss specific issues on the public forums. If you have your thread closed or post deleted you need to go to the staff member, their admin or use the suggestion/complaint box and get help from the Review committee. I apologise if my post came across wrong when I said I would comment later. TheDag and the people involved have been contacted privately about this.

For that reason, I will not comment here on the specific thread other than to say this. Threads should not be closed just because they are 'old'. There has been miscommunication here and there were other reasons this thread was closed, mainly because protocol was not followed correctly when the thread was first moved. For those involved in the thread, you are welcome to start a new thread on this topic in the appropriate area if you wish to continue the discussion. There is no trouble with that.

The OP and all of those involved in the mix-up have been contacted about this so it should not happen again.

[Crazy Liz]

SinneD is right in what he said to an extent. We can not discuss specific issues on the public forums. If you have your thread closed or post deleted you need to go to the staff member, their admin or use the suggestion/complaint box and get help from the Review committee. I apologise if my post came across wrong when I said I would comment later. TheDag and the people involved have been contacted privately about this.

For that reason, I will not comment here on the specific thread other than to say this. Threads should not be closed just because they are 'old'. There has been miscommunication here and there were other reasons this thread was closed, mainly because protocol was not followed correctly when the thread was first moved. For those involved in the thread, you are welcome to start a new thread on this topic in the appropriate area if you wish to continue the discussion. There is no trouble with that.

The OP and all of those involved in the mix-up have been contacted about this so it should not happen again.
Can I have one of those PMs, too?

Thank you.

[Crazy Liz]

chaoschristian had some posts, oh, maybe a year back or so at the Board That Dare Not Speak Its Name regarding this. Mostly it involves specifying a vision and then evaluating rules and practices in light of that vision.
I think I remember some of that. Erwin had quite a bit more clarity in his vision, even though there was always a tension between the ideas of community and proprietorship. We could appeal to the staff and to Erwin to make policies more congruent with the vision and staff behavior more congruent with announced policy.

But that discussion has been split off to another thread (http://christianforums.com/t6663496-cf-the-community-cf-the-business.html).

[Crazy Liz]

SinneD is right in what he said to an extent. We can not discuss specific issues on the public forums. If you have your thread closed or post deleted you need to go to the staff member, their admin or use the suggestion/complaint box and get help from the Review committee. I apologise if my post came across wrong when I said I would comment later. TheDag and the people involved have been contacted privately about this.

For that reason, I will not comment here on the specific thread other than to say this. Threads should not be closed just because they are 'old'. There has been miscommunication here and there were other reasons this thread was closed, mainly because protocol was not followed correctly when the thread was first moved. For those involved in the thread, you are welcome to start a new thread on this topic in the appropriate area if you wish to continue the discussion. There is no trouble with that.

The OP and all of those involved in the mix-up have been contacted about this so it should not happen again.
Could we perhaps get some more specifics about what staff can and cannot tell us in this thread (http://christianforums.com/t6664441-secrecy.html)?

[TheDag]

Hi all
I started this thread because I wanted an answer to my question. I have been given an answer by cat goes meow. However if people want to complain about rules could you please not hijack my thread. If I wasn't talking about a specific thread then I could understand the posts made. Since I have received an answer I will ask that this thread be closed.

Once again I would like to say thankyou to cat goes meow for looking into this and getting back to me. I know people are concerned about cover ups but in practice it has not happened here. I wonder if we are just assuming people are going to do the worst rather than the best?

[Crazy Liz]

Hi all
I started this thread because I wanted an answer to my question. I have been given an answer by cat goes meow. However if people want to complain about rules could you please not hijack my thread. If I wasn't talking about a specific thread then I could understand the posts made. Since I have received an answer I will ask that this thread be closed.

Once again I would like to say thankyou to cat goes meow for looking into this and getting back to me. I know people are concerned about cover ups but in practice it has not happened here. I wonder if we are just assuming people are going to do the worst rather than the best?
Since you posted it in a forum for public policy discussions, several more of us asked for the same answer. We have not received it.

If you think you are the only one entitled to an answer, why open a public thread about it?

[synger]

While I don't can't speak to this particular staff action, I may be able to give some general insight on moderation process, and various reasons why threads might be closed. Keep in mind that unless there is a specific violation, like something being off-topic for that particular forum, you could probably begin a separate discussion thread.

Also keep in mind that each moderation team does things a little differently, process-wise, and that each forum may have its own forum-specific guidelines that define what is and is not on-topic for that forum.

In general, most of the permanent thread closings I've seen have been for:

being completely off-topic,
being inappropriate/graphic/vulgar,
devolving into a flame-fest of violations, or
to stop old threads from being bumped.
As Lindon mentioned above, resurrected threads might be closed. Even if it hasn't been that long in calendar-time, in board-time a few months can be a really long time. People come and go so quickly. If posters bump an old thread and begin quoting posts from people who no longer post regularly, it can be quite disruptive. I've also seen threads closed when they bump old news that is no longer applicable (like election stuff), or old policy discussions that have been resolved.

Usually, though, there is a preponderance of violations that results in a thread closing. If a thread has devolved into a flame fest, it can be closed for a cool-down period or for staff review. During that time, the staff is probably looking at the thread to see how extensive the flames are and whether the thread itself is salvageable. Sometimes it is salvageable, and the mods clean up the violations and re-open the thread. Sometimes they determine that it's better to close the thread permanently. If the actual topic is still of interest to people, they are encouraged to start a new thread, without the flames.

In general, I've noticed in Theology that threads that start with something offensive, graphic, inflammatory, or vulgar, and just go from there, are likely to be closed fairly quickly and stay closed.

Those that begin with a normal question or statement, and have a good solid discussion for the first few pages, and THEN devolve into a flame-fest, are more likely to be closed for review and re-opened after cleaning. If it is an appropriate discussion, we try to keep it going as long as there's still steam in it. (which is probably why we're on the third thread (roll-over) discussing Harry Potter, the fourth dealing with Women in Authority, and I-don't-know-how-many on Catholic doctrine vs. Protestant doctrine).

These are just my observations on why threads are usually closed. In general, thread closure isn't done that much, that I can tell. But I hope it helps a little to explain some of the reasons why it might happen.

[Crazy Liz]

In the case of this particular thread, once the reason for closing was asked, the entire thread quickly disappeared, and no explanation for that has been given except "historical reasons."

[ravenscape]

Thread closed at OPer's request, since their question has been answered.