Question answered, thread closed. = New Rule

[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.

[Mykel]

Originally Posted by Sam

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.

What you have said has absolutely nothing to do with what I said. You just made a rash generalization for "we can do whatever we want whenever we want because we can."

No one said it was a democracy. Did we vote on the rules? No. Did we vote on the new infraction rules? No. Do we vote on anything new that happens on these forums? No. Only recently has Unix actually reached out to us and asked us for our opinion (in the thread about lifetime classic).

However, no one said they have a problem with this lack of a democracy. If we had a democracy, things would be unruly. The majority of forum users understand this.

The problem we have is with you making up new rules because you think they apply. If they are rules, then enforce them as rules. But when you start doing random closings and post deletions. I say once again, no one has a problem with the lack of democracy. In fact, I would say it is understood on a professional basis.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Mykel

What you have said has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.

Okay so I misunderstood that:

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.

Originally Posted by Googi

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

I didn't said you said that.

[Mykel]

Well then?

When is it that you are going to stop seeing us as whiney little kids and actually treat us like paying customers and uphold a professional attitude.

Call my psychic, but I'd be willing to bet that around about the same time that you guys made that change, there would be a drastic change in complaints (or lack thereof) and problems in general on the forums.

[Googi]

Originally Posted by Sam

I didn't said you said that.

Then what's the relevance? You're saying something that nobody is disputing.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Googi

Then what's the relevance? You're saying something that nobody is disputing.

I've said: it is not against a rule to close a thread. I was referring to you in that wise, you use to say that "it's not against the rules" when mods telling anyone to stop doing something. You got it?

[Googi]

Originally Posted by Sam

I've said: it is not against a rule to close a thread. I was referring to you in that wise, you use to say that "it's not against the rules" when mods telling anyone to stop doing something. You got it?

Moderators shouldn't close threads because a question has been answered because doing so is needless, not because doing so is a rule violation.

[James205]

I honestly think it's ridiculous to say players are complaining again and seeking reasons to complain...

This is a community, come on. Then you argue and say there is no rule about closing answered threads. How can you defend yourself, you did something that was out of context and behond the rules and you are trying to defend it because you don't want to admit that you might be wrong. Any mature person would no doubt resolve the situation instead of arguing with people, because there is no way you can say they are wrong, even if you bring petty claims that state there is no rule doing so.