Moderation thoughts.......

[Lone Wolf]

So it would logically follow that if a certain poster has over 24,000 posts, over 21,000 of those posts would be BS?

yes. you are correct

[DapperD]

I don't connect someone who posts IN FAVOR of a moderated board with rabble-rousing. DapperD resurrected this thread to say he doesn't like it when threads are locked. Which poster is stirring up trouble? Both? Neither?

Someone suggested I add a dancing banana to my comment about limiting threads to 35 posts, but at the time the statement seemed so outrageous I didn't think a dancing banana would be necessary.

Should I go back and add the dancing banana? Nah. I hate those things.

And just so you understand, I am not saying that I do not agree with threads being locked. There are threads that without a doubt will serve no purpose, are inflammatory, unexceptable, not thought through before posted, etc... If you had read Jack Tarlin's original post, I was agreeing with him that not every thread needs to be locked down due to certain individuals posting inflammatory or disparaging remarks and/or redirection of the threads original discussion. There are other alternatives and modes of action that could be chosen, such as a "weeding" of the posts that are offending/offensive. There were, as Jack Tarlin stated, some threads that were closed that I was enjoying that for whatever reason were locked down, and it was a major disappointment when one is following a thread and it is abruptly extinguished. Cheers

[Tinker]

yes. you are correct

Not quite - They might be WS .
The past, however, is past, and things (and people) can and do change (and even improve!).
I like to think that we mellow with age, but sometimes I realize that, for some, aging means that it takes a few more punches before you knock the other guy out .

[Pedaling Fool]

...some threads that were closed that I was enjoying that for whatever reason were locked down, and it was a major disappointment when one is following a thread and it is abruptly extinguished. Cheers

I hear you, I was extremely disappointed when the 9,000 Ph.Ds thread was killed. Ever since then I haven't been the same


Been trying to get excited about other thread, but a no-go so far.

[berkshirebirder]

OMG...59 pages! No moderator in their right mind would wade through all that. Are there valuable kernels of insight in that thread???

[weary]

OMG...59 pages! No moderator in their right mind would wade through all that. Are there valuable kernels of insight in that thread???

No thread reaches 59 pages without having some valuable insights. What sometimes happens is that someone starts a lame joke, and others try to top it, ending discussion.

[Mags]

I did not understand that older threads here at Whiteblaze were not supposed to be brought back to the board

Oh..it's not forbidden. It is just a factor of Internet life. Threads than been dormant for nearly 2 yrs (as in this case) are brought back to life. They are called "Zombie Threads". Sometimes they re-spark an interesting discussion. Sometimes they revive that proverbial dead horse.

I'm just being a smart ass with a mildly funny photo.

[Sierra Echo]

Oh..it's not forbidden. It is just a factor of Internet life. Threads than been dormant for nearly 2 yrs (as in this case) are brought back to life. They are called "Zombie Threads". Sometimes they re-spark an interesting discussion. Sometimes they revive that proverbial dead horse.

I'm just being a smart ass with a mildly funny photo.

But, if someone posts a question that has already been answered those many 2 yrs ago, someone always makes sure too post in a nasty manner about how there has already been a thread on that, and why arent they posting under that thread as opposed to bothering everyone with a new one!

[4eyedbuzzard]

But, if someone posts a question that has already been answered those many 2 yrs ago, someone always makes sure too post in a nasty manner about how there has already been a thread on that, and why arent they posting under that thread as opposed to bothering everyone with a new one!

It's likely that damn near every question asked has been answered before, unless it's about some new piece of gear, and even then . . .

What can anyone tell anyone else that is truly unique about hiking that hasn't been beaten to death at some point in a past thread? Buy all the cool stuff made of titanium, aluminum, wool, down, and nylon you like, then go to Springer Mt. in April and place one foot in front of the other, repeat 5 million times.

There's nothing wrong with people posting the "normal questions". Gives all the addicts here something to talk about. Those who reply in a nasty manner simply need to find other subjects to discuss, or not reply.

[berkshirebirder]

You're right, Weary. I see the "9000 PhDs" thread was about global warming. In a quick scan of the first 10 pages and then a scan of every tenth page after that, it seemed to stay pretty much on topic. But let's face it, if the thread hadn't been closed, a few of those posters still would be going back and forth. At some point, it's time to move on.

So that's a "Zombie Thread"? Now I get the photo, MAGS. LOL.

[The Old Fhart]

............

[Blue Jay]

You're right, Weary. I see the "9000 PhDs" thread was about global warming. In a quick scan of the first 10 pages and then a scan of every tenth page after that, it seemed to stay pretty much on topic. But let's face it, if the thread hadn't been closed, a few of those posters still would be going back and forth. At some point, it's time to move on.

It's really quite simple, that's the point when the "closers" (not an insult just a discriptor) need to move on. Why do you want a thread closed just because it does not interest you? Seriously, why? I'd love it if the constant pole advertizements stopped, but I would NEVER advocate stopping the clear enjoyment it give pole worshipers. Again why do you wish to stop others enjoyment of harmless fun?

[berkshirebirder]

Blue Jay,

This thread was started 2 years ago. I don't know the history of WB or the threads that prompted Jack's comments.

I believe a moderated message board brings more enjoyment to more people than an unmoderated message board brings to a handful of people talking among themselves and another handful of lurkers who enjoy that kind of interaction.

I'm not a moderator. I respect their judgment--often, they know a lot about what goes on behind the scenes. They know what topics have caused problems, what posters have caused problems. It doesn't bother me if a thread is closed--I can still read it. I don't think it's fair to expect a moderator to read every word of every post in order to decide who said what, and what they meant by it.

Some posters want an unmoderated board, and others want some degree of moderation. It's a difference of opinion, and isn't that what makes a board interesting to begin with?