+- Qbasicnews.com (http://qbasicnews.com/newforum)
+-- Forum: QbasicNews.Com (http://qbasicnews.com/newforum/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: Site/Forum Issues (http://qbasicnews.com/newforum/forum-9.html)
+--- Thread: Important Poll =) (/thread-2177.html)
Important Poll =) - TheBigBasicQ - 10-12-2003
I dont have much business poking my nose into the incident concerning you know who
. But to prevent such incidents I wanted to conduct a poll.Thank you for your co-operation
Important Poll =) - na_th_an - 10-12-2003
I voted no. Only an admin/moderator has the right to do some censorship. If everyone could lock threads this would become a "I say and don't listen" forum.
I was even against the lock feature, even by admins, but I understand that sometimes it may be useful.
Important Poll =) - TheBigBasicQ - 10-12-2003
But if there is some prob with the communication with the admin/moderator then the person will not be able to stop posting to his thread. So it might be a good tool. But at the same time what you say is true as well.
But the person found abusing this utility can be banned from locking his threads.
Important Poll =) - Agamemnus - 10-12-2003
I voted yes, but after reading Nathan's post, I would vote no...
Important Poll =) - TheBigBasicQ - 10-12-2003
What about mine? There is a condition - if the person misuses it the facility will be removed!
Important Poll =) - na_th_an - 10-12-2003
But define "misuse". IMHO, the line which has to be crossed is hard to describe. It pisses me off about 90% of the times a thread gets locked 'cause I feel things should not be done that way. Many times (in the heat of the moment, of course), I find realy hypocrite to lock a thread 'cause it is censorship. Of course there are many pricks around here (and each time more, sadly) who need to be shut up sometimes, but that's a task of the admin. The site is his.
Giving people the ability to lock their threads is just not a good idea.
Important Poll =) - TheBigBasicQ - 10-12-2003
But the admin/ moderators cant be around all the time. And something has to be done to prevent unwanted posts from being posted. Also I would define "misuse" as any unwarranted use of the facility. Also, the thread would be locked temporarily and an admin/moderator can unlock it if he finds that it has been unappropriately locked.
Important Poll =) - na_th_an - 10-12-2003
Unwanted? What's unwanted? If someone post something wrong, it only goes agains himself. I mean, if someone posts something razist or xenophobe for example it doesn't hurt me but his image. From that post I will know he's an arse.
Well, that's only my opinion.
Important Poll =) - TheBigBasicQ - 10-12-2003
You are missing the point. Suppose somebody opens a thread for a discussion and long after the discussion is over still some pricks keep posting some offending posts. In such a case if the admin/moderator is unavailable to lock the thread at the request of the person who started it, then in such a case the individual should be able to temporarily lock the thread. After an admin/moderator logs in, he can review the locked threads and if he finds that the thread has been appropriately locked he should leave it as it is or else he should unlock it.
Important Poll =) - na_th_an - 10-13-2003
Yeah, I got your point and I understand what you are saying. But my claim is that nobody has the right to censor anyone. The only person who I would agree to have that right is the owner of the site, 'cause the site is his.
In other words: only Wildcard should be able to censor 'cause he is the one who pays for the site and he does what he wants with his server space. Other kind of thread closing by someone else would be considered by myself as an insult to our intelligence because I strongly feel and believe that nobody has the right to tell me to shut up if I am not at his house.