kallend 1,623 #1 January 10, 2003 I'd like to suggest that locking a thread in response to the development of personal attacks simply punishes those who were behaving appropriately as much as it punishes the perpetrator of the attacks. IMO, a better approach would be to lock out the individual who is abusing the forum.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #2 January 10, 2003 That happens after a person doesn't catch a clue. Everyone has the ability of getting caught up and slipping up in the forums, multipul times, that's the problem.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #3 January 10, 2003 QuoteThat happens after a person doesn't catch a clue. Everyone has the ability of getting caught up and slipping up in the forums, multipul times, that's the problem. But why punish the innocent?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 259 #4 January 10, 2003 Locking a thread usually serves to stop the argument and remind everyone of the rules. Banning someone's user name from a forum is an absolute last resort, used only if the person repeatedly engages in personal attacks. If every person who's posted an attack here was banned, these would be some quiet forums... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #5 January 10, 2003 QuoteLocking a thread usually serves to stop the argument and remind everyone of the rules. ... No doubt about that - but is it the optimal way? Stifling a discussion because one or two people are abusive does not seem the best way to deal with the problem, IMO.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sangiro 4 #6 January 10, 2003 I am not going to lock people out every time they break a rule. Your sanction is disproportionate to the offense. If someone repeatedly breaks the rules, locking them out becomes an option. You don't have a right to have your discussion on here, regardless of how useful you think it may be. If people can not have it like adults then take it somewhere else (like rec.skydiving). I've been doing this for a while and I'm comfortable with how the moderators handled the thread that you tried to reopen, something you should not attempt on here.Safe swoops Sangiro Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Craig 0 #7 January 10, 2003 Perhaps it is not possible but I will throw out another idea. Instead of going as far as locking someone completly out of a forum, or locking the entire thread just deny their posting ability to that particular thread. I guess then they would feel "singled out" and complain elsewhere on here though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #8 January 10, 2003 Quote I am not going to lock people out every time they break a rule. Your sanction is disproportionate to the offense. If someone repeatedly breaks the rules, locking them out becomes an option. You don't have a right to have your discussion on here, regardless of how useful you think it may be. If people can not have it like adults then take it somewhere else (like rec.skydiving). I've been doing this for a while and I'm comfortable with how the moderators handled the thread that you tried to reopen, something you should not attempt on here. Well, it's your site and you pay the bills, so you get to make the rules.All I'm suggesting (and this is the suggestions forum) is that you don't let the abusive posters control the debate, which is exactly what happens when an otherwise useful thread is locked because of one or two people who make personal attacks. It's like punishing an entire class because one kid misbehaves.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #9 January 10, 2003 John -- To a certain extent I think you might be one to something, as you're correct, it -can- punish the innocent and keep useful information from flowing. It also stops arguments, so it does have its' uses. However, I think the best way to continue -after- a thread has been locked is to sit back for a couple of hours and try to see the intelligent parts of the conversation and then maybe rephrase the subject line so as not to draw the same people immediately back into the same argument.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sangiro 4 #10 January 10, 2003 John, I agree with you in principle. The reality is that it is often very hard if not impossible to figure out who the "guilty" and the "innocent" is. I have been on these forums for a long time and I have seen people provoke users into breaking the rules and launching personal attacks without breaking the rules themselves in the process. It's a slippery slope. This is a medium that is easily manipulated and easy to abuse. When a thread goes sour I am less concerned about who's "guilty" and who's "innocent" and more concerned about the fact that there's a thread on my site that's threatening the character of the community that I'm trying to create here. That is the most important thing to me. I believe that if we succeed in creating that character and prevent this from becoming another wreck, that over time it will allow us to have all the "usefull" conversations we need to have in a civilized manner. Repeat offenders are easy to spot over time and I'll deal with them. In the end I can not break down rules and their enforcement to a level where it becomes so granular that all we do is trying to figure out who's "guilty" and who's "innocent" and police it at that level. I have no desire to lock threads. We are just as frustrated as you are when threads go south and we have to stop them, especially when there were useful discussions going on within the noise. I have re-opened threads in the past after cleaning them up and will do it again if I think it makes sense. Paul's advice about letting the dust settle is good advice.Safe swoops Sangiro Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #11 January 11, 2003 QuoteIMO, a better approach would be to lock out the individual who is abusing the forum. One point that should be mentioned is that its very easy for 'banned' users to simply reregister under a different username. This has been done countless times by a few individuals who didn't figure things out the easy way. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #12 January 11, 2003 HH can ban IP addy's as well, though.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #13 January 11, 2003 QuoteHH can ban IP addy's as well, though. Considering the number of people who have dynamically assigned IP addresses (dialup, and occasionally cable and DSL) this just isn't a good solution. HH (or anyone else for that matter) would be required to block an entire range of addresses to keep one individual out. Blocking a single address won't work, blocking a range of addresses just sucks. - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #14 January 11, 2003 He can do that too, but that is a very very last option. Yes, as you said, that would suck.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #15 January 11, 2003 QuoteHe can do that too, but that is a very very last option. Yes, as you said, that would suck. Shutting off an interesting and maybe useful discussion because one or two people behave like jerks sucks too. Basically, it allows the jerks to control the debate. Maybe there is no good solution.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sarge 0 #16 January 12, 2003 Hey boss, I',m just wondering... I was gonna send a PM to skymonkeyone with regard to the Steel guy. thought better of it, but any way? I just wondering if what happened was my imagination...? did all that correspondence really occur? even before the deleted post(s), I just don't understand what happened to that total next thread that got opened up? was I seeing things, is it gone? was it ever really there? I woke up thinking I had just been intimate with Alice? man was I just dreaming... why is my underwear wet...?-- I'm done with the personally meaningful and philosophical sigs!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
