Why do the mods all alot of posts to slide (personal attacks, references to things that are not pg, etc.) but lock threads that are 2 weeks or older? I mean, yes, if its a spam bump, I can see a lock, but if something legit is being added to the discussion (new idea, etc.), I don't see how the locking leads to productivity.
Question on locking
- Thread starter Papi/Manny
- Start date
most of the time it isnt productive. It is usually better to make a new thread about it.
I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that there aren't a whole lot of mods on here. THe staff numbers are low, and posts do get past staff members.
Papi/Manny said:
People report the thread revives.
They're not reporting the other stuff.
Rather hard to enforce when we aren't aware of the violation. These forums are too busy for us to read everything. A lot depends on the members.
I understand that. However, that doens't really answer why it's needed to lock a thread thats been bumped, partiucarlly when an update has occured (or something along those lines). If its something like "oh, XX beats YY" then I can see the need for a lock. Also, if any bump for a 2 week+ thread is going to be locked, why not just lock the topic when it gets that old anyways?
Wouldn't that take too much time? I actually wanted to lock every thread in clans and clubs that was dead after my reform, just for the sake of it, but it's not as easy as you think.
But you did bring up a good point about the thing where... Er, useful discussion could be blah, or whatever you said, as long it's not spam. Well, I don't know, but yeah.
Forget what I said in the second "paragraph". ._.
But you did bring up a good point about the thing where... Er, useful discussion could be blah, or whatever you said, as long it's not spam. Well, I don't know, but yeah.
Forget what I said in the second "paragraph". ._.