Question for mods

[mech]

Hi guys,

I've noticed a few topics locked of late here which to me looked fine - I can't figure out why they were locked. Like the PS3 having 512MB of RAM one, or the "congrats Vince" one.

Can I ask why they were locked? Serious question, not trying to start a flame war or irritate you guys, I'm just curious.

Cheers...

 

[cthellis42]

With the 512MB one, I imagine it's because there's ANOTHER one dealing with RAM as well, and that the locked one was breaking down into random banter quickly rather than staying on target anyway.

I'm not entirely sure about the other one, as it has SOME trollish comments being tossed about in the middle, but on the end page had settled back into a semblance of calm and actual conversation. (Unless there are posts deleted from it that I'm unaware of.)

I'm sure most of it, though, just comes from the desire to cull the number of CELL/PS3-related posts down, as there's been an epic high of them because of the ISSCC. And they're not all NEEDING their own threads.

 

[Farid]

I'm definitely not a mod, but since that's not a PM either, I can point out that the 512MB for PS3 thread was redundant and incorrect (512Mbits chips =/= 512MBytes of system RAM on the PS3) by the way.

edit: I really should hit F5 before posting.

 

[mech]

Mmmm I guess, if they're going to lock it it's nice if they put a note on saying why and a link to the other thread when it's a redundant thread - that's what Dave used to do (still does?) in the hardware forums.

 

[ChryZ]

I demand to know, why my ISSCC 2005 was locked. It was good thread with reports directly from the conference, lots of useful details and discussions. So far the best source of offical information regarding the CELL architecture. I am really pissed

 

[ZoinKs!]

I demand to know, why my ISSCC 2005 was locked. It was good thread with reports directly from the conference, lots of useful details and discussions. So far the best source of offical information regarding the CELL architecture. I am really pissed

That's a strange one. It's odd to see the best thread with some of the best info and discussion the console forum has seen for months suddenly locked without a single word of explanation and no readily apparent reason. :?

 

[Sonic]

The ISSCC thread has now been reopened. We are trying to limit the amount of threads on CELL because there are so many of them, and much of them have turned into redundant threads that are doing nothing but repeating the same arguments.

 

[ChryZ]

The ISSCC thread has now been reopened. We are trying to limit the amount of threads on CELL because there are so many of them, and much of them have turned into redundant threads that are doing nothing but repeating the same arguments.

Thanks, maybe it would be a good idea to make the most promising thread sticky and lock redundant threads with a reference to the sticky one. After a while people will get used to it and later on when a sticky isn't interesting anymore, just unsticky it and let it sink. The current way of handling things is very inefficient.

 

[AzBat]

I'm confused why get rid of redundant threads? As long as the thread is civil I see no reason to ever lock one. Everyone has a choice to read or not read. Redundant threads seem to only to make it slightly difficult for regular visitors. If they don't like it, then they can go somewhere else.

Additionally, there is a thing called being considerate. When I was running my forums I would email the authors before moving or deleting their threads/messages. I would also NEVER edit somebody else's message. I think that's just plain wrong.

Anyway, if you MODs are going to take the time to moderate the forums at least take the time to post a message in the thread explaining why you did what you did. If nobody knows what was wrong, then they will never know to not to do it again. Kinda works hand in hand with not editing someone's message. Leave it there for posterity and maybe people will actually learn to not repeat history. Sorry, but about that rant, but that has always been a HUGE beef I've always had with the moderation done on this site.

Tommy McClain

 

[Sonic]

Thank you for the feedback everyone. When we lock threads from now on we will explain why we did it and give a reason. We will try to pm the author before the thread is locked and if anyone else feels that it is unfairly locked then please pm me or jvd explaining why. We will look at it and consider unlocking it.

 

[jvd]

I locked the 512 meg one because it had incorrect information in it and there was already a 5 page thread about the correct information going at that point in time .

I don't mind so much cell talk , but there are other things to talk about and we can easily discuss all of it on the front page if we combine like things and cull duplicates .

 

[AzBat]

Guys,

Thanks for considering the feedback. Hopefully the forum will be better for it.

Tommy McClain

 

[Guden Oden]

I'm currently having a rather baffling PM conversation with one of our mods why the ISSCC thread was locked. His first reply was more or less, 'why do you want to know?', and his second was an Obi-wan-esque 'you don't need to know'.

Fortunately, his jedi mind-tricks don't work on me, so I hope I will get an answer eventually, but why is it neccessary to have to ask quite so many times why a thread was locked for what seems no particular reason?

The current mods were elected by the members of the forum, but it seems they now consider themselves not accountable to their own electorate. Perhaps we should have put a time-limit on their terms, I dunno. It just feels odd this person has to make it such a big issue out of something rather simple. Is it a matter of prestige now or what? :?

 

[London Geezer]

I'm currently having a rather baffling PM conversation with one of our mods why the ISSCC thread was locked. His first reply was more or less, 'why do you want to know?', and his second was an Obi-wan-esque 'you don't need to know'.

Fortunately, his jedi mind-tricks don't work on me, so I hope I will get an answer eventually, but why is it neccessary to have to ask quite so many times why a thread was locked for what seems no particular reason?

The current mods were elected by the members of the forum, but it seems they now consider themselves not accountable to their own electorate. Perhaps we should have put a time-limit on their terms, I dunno. It just feels odd this person has to make it such a big issue out of something rather simple. Is it a matter of prestige now or what? :?

No they weren't.

 

[ChryZ]

His first reply was more or less, 'why do you want to know?', and his second was an Obi-wan-esque 'you don't need to know'.

:?

 

[jvd]

The current mods were elected by the members of the forum, but it seems they now consider themselves not accountable to their own electorate

Dunno where u get this from but sonic and I make sure we don't lock a thread unless there is a ton of cursing , name calling , trolling , or the information has been posted already .

Look at the thread and see if any of this was going on in the thread and you could have your answer

 

[Sonic]

jvd, I already cleared this up with him. He bugged me enough times on it and it was getting to the point where he was attacking me. After I apologized enough times he still wanted an answer. I'm not going to sit here and defend myself for osmething I did, but I will go back and look at the thread and that's what I did. I reopened it.

Guden, please don't take it so personal next time.

 

[jvd]

okay no problem .

(runs back to his hole)

 

[digitalwanderer]

Please don't stop on my account, this is juicy stuff!