Question answered, thread closed. = New Rule

[Darlene159]

Originally Posted by konidias

People are always going to argue... Especially when there is so much to argue about. I don't see how it can possibly be moderated. There would probably be far less arguing if it wasn't.

There is no rule against arguing per say. There is nothing at all wrong with people disagreeing with each other. there is nothing at all wrong with having a debate in which there are many different sides/opinons. This is the way people learn to view other peoples sides of things, and is a very good thing.
It would be nice if we could have more "discussions" like this on these forums without people insulting other people. Such as calling others idiots, stupid, ignorant, *****s, etc....
A debate is suppose to be people giving their opinions on different things, not to get angry because they are being disagreed with, and insult.

I have seen a few good debates on these forums, but I have seen many more debates that ended up more of a flame war then anything else, which, as Unixmad puts it, makes the forums an unfriendly place, which he clearly does not want.

[Googi]

Originally Posted by Darlene159

There is no rule against arguing per say. There is nothing at all wrong with people disagreeing with each other.

Yet it is a valid reason for thread closures?

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Googi

Yet it is a valid reason for thread closures?

I don't see any rule against closing a thread, especially when the topic was answered.

[konidias]

Originally Posted by Sam

I don't see any rule against closing a thread, especially when the topic was answered.

I don't see any rule against closing every thread after the first post but that doesn't make it okay to do so.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by konidias

I don't see any rule against closing every thread after the first post but that doesn't make it okay to do so.

Hehehe, you know that this is a feeble argument, because we do not close every thread after the firt post. And to spam or insult or whatever doesn't also make thing better, but some ppl still do it.

However: I am sure Moonie or any mod will not have a problem to reopen a thread on request, if there is not a very important factor to leave it closed.
For me it still makes sense to close threads when the topic is discussed or the answer was given. On the other side I read almost everyday from forum users the sentence "why you post in a 3 month old thread" or like this.
So why leave threads open if people upbraid if someone post a month later in this open, old thread...?

[konidias]

I was exaggerating. The point is, just because it's not against the rules for a mod to close a thread for the reason of "everything has been answered" doesn't mean it should be okay to close them.

It's impossible to argue why it's better to close threads than it is to leave them open. Leaving them open... sure someone might complain if an old thread is revived... But at least someone had a chance to reply. If you close it, nobody can reply to that thread.

All you're doing is encouraging people to post entirely new threads just to reply to some subject that was in a closed thread.

I can't believe we're even having a debate over this. It should be pretty clear that closing threads just because you think they've served their purpose is just dumb. There is no other way to describe it. You're not doing the community a favor by locking up conversations. Plus the excuse of "I wanted to prevent a flamewar" just shows that you have no faith in the community to control themselves, so why should we bother to behave when you've already determined we are troublemakers?

[Sam]

Originally Posted by konidias

I was exaggerating. The point is, just because it's not against the rules for a mod to close a thread...

I've said it because it makes me mad to read this "it's not against the rules argument" every day.

Originally Posted by konidias

It's impossible to argue why it's better to close threads than it is to leave them open. Leaving them open... sure someone might complain if an old thread is revived... But at least someone had a chance to reply. If you close it, nobody can reply to that thread.

You're not doing the community a favor by locking up conversations. Plus the excuse of "I wanted to prevent a flamewar" just shows that you have no faith in the community to control themselves, so why should we bother to behave when you've already determined we are troublemakers?

As I've said before, there is a way to ask for reopening. And, Konidias, do you really think ppl calm down in a minute a stop flaming?
However, I think we got the message from you (community) and we will handle it in the future more sensitive.

[Mykel]

Originally Posted by Sam

However: I am sure Moonie or any mod will not have a problem to reopen a thread on request, if there is not a very important factor to leave it closed.

Actually, no. I sent Moonie a PM about the thread that was closed because the "question was answered" and she replied back, and then when I replied back saying many of the same things that have been said here, she simply stopped replying.

Originally Posted by Sam

I've said it because it makes me mad to read this "it's not against the rules argument" every day.

Guess what? If you choose to take actions that aren't within the rules, then we are going to say something about it. The threads will stop as soon as the actions are up to par.

You have to consider yourselves the rule keepers (or police officers if you will) of the forums. You police the forums for rule violations. However, when you start taking actions, deleting posts, and closing threads that break no rules, you will be judged by your forum userbase. Unix wants you to enforce the rules, and no one has a problem with that, we have a problem with you enforcing non-rules.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Mykel

You have to consider yourselves the rule keepers (or police officers if you will) of the forums. You police the forums for rule violations. However, when you start taking actions, deleting posts, and closing threads that break no rules, you will be judged by your forum userbase. Unix wants you to enforce the rules, and no one has a problem with that, we have a problem with you enforcing non-rules.

Nobody said the forums are a participatory democracy. The mods have a job assignment by the management of Linux cyberjoueurs. If my boss Moonie, or her boss Unixmad tells us to stop doing something or to do something we have to do it. But Unixmad gave us a of wide scope, so if we feel getting attacked we will also stop leaving a margin with things.

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by Sam

I don't see any rule against closing a thread, especially when the topic was answered.

Why have a forum with masses of closed threads? It would just look terrible.

[Googi]

Originally Posted by Sam

I don't see any rule against closing a thread, especially when the topic was answered.

Point out where I said that closing them is a rule violation.