Closing/merging Threads

Elmo

Can mods please private message posters when choosing to close/merge threads. Explanations are required and some courtesy. Temporarily close the thread and if a valid reason is given then you may re-open the thread.

Then you may judge if the person has a valid reason for their post, otherwise you may close/merge the thread.

I.e. the offender or original posters not everyone on the thread, that would be a waste of time.

Rather then posting to the thread while closing you should message the offender and close the thread.

sceptre

Can you give a few examples of closers you're annoyed with Elmo? I can understand your general comment that you'd like to see a message sent when a thread is locked (though you haven't said to whom). Are you suggesting this as distinct from a message put in the thread by the moderator when closing it?

Elmo

sceptre wrote: »

Can you give a few examples of closers you're annoyed with Elmo? I can understand your general comment that you'd like to see a message sent when a thread is locked (though you haven't said to whom). Are you suggesting this as distinct from a message put in the thread by the moderator when closing it?

When closing a thread a moderator should: -

1. Advise through a private message to either the OP or the person who has caused the locking.
2. Close the thread until such time as the get a response from the OP or the Offender.
3. Make a decision based on that response.

In film reviews a review I place on a film from 2005 called Hard Candy, I believe due to the number of Spoilers in the review but I cannot say that for definite (it was from 2005! I don't think I could review 6th sense now without spoilers and why would I want to?).

Recently I post to the "Finance/Economy or something forum" to a post from 2005 because I was genuinely interested in the subject matter, closed due to rules surrounding old threads, the thread should have been archived in some way to prevent posts after a year or 2 from the final post on the thread.

But I did have a good reason for both posts.

sceptre

Ah, I see your point of view, but that's more complicated than it needs to be. Picking and choosing from the OP or someone who causes it to be locked is less efficient than posting on-thread as a general rule so hence it's the general "rule" that's followed. There should be a reason left at all times for locking. The option to PM the mod is still open to the OP, anyone who may have contributed to the locking or anyone else passing.

We don't archive threads. It may be something that will be looked into at some point but because of the complication whereby some old threads are still very much active, you end up with a series of judgement calls, which doesn't improve the situation much (if at all) over what we currently have.

I'm sure you had a good reason for both posts. A thread dredged up from 2005 would be something I'd be rather unlikely to allow a rebirth of unless there was a good reason from the perspective of everyone (generally a linkback would be better) but you are likely to get a better specific answer by discussing either or both in particular with the forum mods.

Elmo

sceptre wrote: »

A thread dredged up from 2005 would be something I'd be rather unlikely to allow a rebirth of unless there was a good reason from the perspective of everyone (generally a linkback would be better) but you are likely to get a better specific answer by discussing either or both in particular with the forum mods.

A link back is the same as if I posted to the thread.

The finance issue was IMO a good discussion to have as one of the posters point out that Anglo Irish Bank was a safe investment, I would have been interested in updating the thread as to what we should now be investing into, indeed it could have been a stick.

Historical threads are interesting and one of the major pluses of boards, if you ignore them you ignore the "public sphere" of boards.

Why the wait before my last post went up on this thread?

sceptre

The wait is because posts subsequent to the first one have to be manually approved. While keeping threads limited to the OP and the admins, it's unfortunately a vbulletin limitation.

As I said above, for specific threads brought back to life, you'd be better off contacting the local mod in the first instance, then the cmod if you get no satisfaction and then here in the third resort (or last if you like) (it's also the three steps outlined in the grievance procedure) That's what to do with the finance thread.

As for the linkback being the same as posting, we're just going to have to differ in opinion there - I wouldn't see it as the same as posting to the original thread at all.

If I were you I'd contact the relevant forum mod about the finance thread.

Elmo

For the film issue I contacted all mods and got no reply. And for finance I just contacted the closing mod and got a reply. I thought that this is an issue across boards, rather than just specifically film and finance.

sceptre

Fair enough. As I mentioned above, where appropriate I suggest a linkback for reference. Aware as I am that you don't see any difference, I do and hence that's my suggestion. There isn't a current adequate solution to archiving threads at the moment, even if we wanted to, so that isn't an option for boards while that solution doesn't exist. Notice on the thread itself when locking is the solution that provides everyone with the same information, hence that's why it's done.