Is it possible for the originator of a thread to bar specific individuals from posting in that thread?
Nope. The best you can do is place the undesired individual on your ignore list, and then resist the temptation to click "View Post" every time you see that they have posted. Barring that, you can just report the hell out of them each and every time they post in a manner that justifies reporting.
However this can lead to your threads being locked.
Yeah, Im sure that would do great things to promote unbiased discussion on these boards
So, what you want is the ability for posters who start threads to prevent anyone they know will disagree with them from posting in their thread?
Yeah, Im sure that would do great things to promote unbiased discussion on these boards
No. That is not what I want. Thanks for inquiring, but I'm not interested in any sarcasm today. Please come back later.
No. That is not what I want. Thanks for inquiring, but I'm not interested in any sarcasm today. Please come back later.
Whether that's what you want or not, what you're suggesting would make that a possibility. It would be inevitable.
Rather, if you find someone in violation of the CoC, then you can report them. Other than that, they are (and, in my opinion, should be) totally within their rights to post whatever, wherever (as long as they are not violating the CoC, of course.)
So, what you want is the ability for posters who start threads to prevent anyone they know will disagree with them from posting in their thread?
Yeah, Im sure that would do great things to promote unbiased discussion on these boards
I don't think that was the OP's intention. He said specifically that he was talking about 'trouble makers', therefore he must be talking about the flame/baiters that run rampant on these boards.
I agree with him. I am fine with a lively discussion in which there are disagreements, but almost every thread I've participated in has been derailed and locked due to flaming and baiting.
The OP's post does immediately bring to mind that he just doesn't want anyone to disagree with him. Whether that is true or not, the point stands that the Mods have the power to "prevent" people from posting in certain Threads (via Banning), are paid to do so, are trained to do so, and giving the average Poster such a power would be a horrible idea. :S
Especially giving it to me. None of you dunces would ever post near me again! :P
I don't think that was the OP's intention. He said specifically that he was talking about 'trouble makers', therefore he must be talking about the flame/baiters that run rampant on these boards.
I agree with him. I am fine with a lively discussion in which there are disagreements, but almost every thread I've participated in has been derailed and locked due to flaming and baiting.
I will basically secon Crimson Lancer on this.
If the OP of a thread has the ability to determine who these posters are (and prevent them from posting in a thread) rather than (or possibly in addition to) the mods, then it would be open for widespread abuse. MechaPilot may not have the intention to take advantage of this but nothing would stop others from doing it.
I will basically secon Crimson Lancer on this.
If the OP of a thread has the ability to determine who these posters are (and prevent them from posting in a thread) rather than (or possibly in addition to) the mods, then it would be open for widespread abuse. MechaPilot may not have the intention to take advantage of this but nothing would stop others from doing it.
I can certainly see how the desire for the kind of control I mentioned provokes images of a spiteful loner with monitor reflections in his eyes banning people left and right to the tune of "flight of the valkyries". I will add however that just because some people abuse a privelidge doesn't mean it shouldn't be available to people of reason and common sense.
I can certainly see how the desire for the kind of control I mentioned provokes images of a spiteful loner with monitor reflections in his eyes banning people left and right to the tune of "flight of the valkyries". I will add however that just because some people abuse a privelidge doesn't mean it shouldn't be available to people of reason and common sense.
This is the Internet, where a plethora of people use the anonymity granted to them to actively ignore Reason and Common Sense, if only because it is the only place they CAN ignore Reason and Common Sense with almost no repercussions.
The Boards would be a disaster zone if everyone had Mod privileges. :S
The Boards would be a disaster zone if everyone had Mod privileges. :S
Agreed, that is specifically why I stipulated that kind of control in one's own threads only. Giving everyone mod power on the whole board would, of course, be a totally nutbar idea.
Agreed, that is specifically why I stipulated that kind of control in one's own threads only. Giving everyone mod power on the whole board would, of course, be a totally nutbar idea.
Just no. Only mods have this power for a good reason, and they generally dont create or contribute to conversation on these boards.
What you are asking for is inherently abusable, like a loaded gun in the hands of a chimpanzee.
In conclusion : Your idea is bad, and you should feel bad.
Just no. Only mods have this power for a good reason, and they generally dont create or contribute to conversation on these boards.
What you are asking for is inherently abusable, like a loaded gun in the hands of a chimpanzee.
In conclusion : Your idea is bad, and you should feel bad.
I always feel bad. I grew up fat, so I naturally hate myself and everything I do.
That being said, you do realize you just compared every poster, yourself included, to a chimp right?
I always feel bad. I grew up fat, so I naturally hate myself and everything I do.
That being said, you do realize you just compared every poster, yourself included, to a chimp right?
Give us all mod privileges in our own threads and we WILL BE no better than chimps with revolvers.
This is not a "suck it up or get out" comment, by the way, only saying that I think you're looking at this from the wrong angle.
That would make a forum worthless.
The thing is, you keep saying things like "your thread" or "my thread" or "their thread," but really, this is a community. Once you post something, it's out there for anyone to discuss in this discussion community. If you want to only talk to the people who you feel are not going to be disruptive and do not feel that the board moderation is doing an adequate job at preventing you definition of disruption, there are many less public communication methods once you've met the people you would like to talk to.
This is not a "suck it up or get out" comment, by the way, only saying that I think you're looking at this from the wrong angle.
I have no problem with discussion. Oh lord, would I love to get actual discussion instead of flaming, baiting, misrepresentation of things said earlier in the thread, and circular arguments. Certain parts of these boards are ripe with such things.
That is why the main thrust of the OP was the question of whether or not such things were possible.
And, sure I agree with you about many of the difficulties inherent in that public discussion, but the bottom line is, when you speak here, you are not the one who gets to decide who gets to speak back, due to the very nature of the place as a corporate forum intended for relatively public discourse. You post a thread, but you do not own the thread. Depending on how you look at it, it belongs to the community or the company that operates the community.
I'm sure you are interested in discussion. The problem I see, though, is that you're asking for private discussion within a venue intended for public discussion.
And, sure I agree with you about many of the difficulties inherent in that public discussion, but the bottom line is, when you speak here, you are not the one who gets to decide who gets to speak back, due to the very nature of the place as a corporate forum intended for relatively public discourse. You post a thread, but you do not own the thread. Depending on how you look at it, it belongs to the community or the company that operates the community.
Which is all well and good. Or it would be if posts that were blatantly untrue or intrinsically antagonistic (ie. flaming or baiting without any redeeming content) were deleted when reported. They are not however. Which is why I made the OP.
Although the response has led me to wish once again that we could not see that someone on our ignore list has even posted.
I will basically secon Crimson Lancer on this.
If the OP of a thread has the ability to determine who these posters are (and prevent them from posting in a thread) rather than (or possibly in addition to) the mods, then it would be open for widespread abuse. MechaPilot may not have the intention to take advantage of this but nothing would stop others from doing it.
Yes, but weight this potential abuse against the abuse dealt by the 'folks' that lock threads.
This 'abuse' would amount to threads with nobody posting but this hypothetical abuser...as opposed to the abuse we have now, of the threads which nobody can post in due to the known abusers.
I'd say give it a shot.
So, what you want is the ability for posters who start threads to prevent anyone they know will disagree with them from posting in their thread?
Yeah, Im sure that would do great things to promote unbiased discussion on these boards
The goal of these forums isn't to have unbiased discussions but to have constructive discussions. Certain posters can and do derail threads and ensure any constructive discussion that might have happened is drowned out by their thread-crapping until the thread gets locked.
they are (and, in my opinion, should be) totally within their rights to post whatever, wherever (as long as they are not violating the CoC, of course.)
This assumes the CoC actually works in promoting constructive and friendly discussions while ensuring trolls are kept out of the forum. As has been stated several times in numerous threads in this part, a significant portion of us believe the CoC doesn't work.
I'll also point out Customer Service is the one that creates and modifies CoC, NOT the forum moderators.
I have no problem with discussion. Oh lord, would I love to get actual discussion instead of flaming, baiting, misrepresentation of things said earlier in the thread, and circular arguments. Certain parts of these boards are ripe with such things.
Go to the Eberron forums. They're quite friendly, no matter how crazy your idea is. What's even more amazing is that the subforum has managed to evolve into the ideal forum with very little moderation. I imagine once the 4th ed Eberron books come out the haters and trolls will flock to the subforum, and the changes in the books may twist the gentle posters of the Eberron forum into dark and evil creatures.
But for now you've got 1 more month of a pleasant posting experience
Yes, but weight this potential abuse against the abuse dealt by the 'folks' that lock threads.
This 'abuse' would amount to threads with nobody posting but this hypothetical abuser...as opposed to the abuse we have now, of the threads which nobody can post in due to the known abusers.
I'd say give it a shot.
But, multiple threads on the same topic are not allowed. Other threads would not be allowed to cover the same topic.
They are either locked or merged.
So either the person who caused trouble in the past would have his thread locked, the person not causing trouble would have his thread locked, or the threads would be merged.
If the threads were merged, could you stop the person who had previously caused trouble from posting in the thread?
If the person who was previlously causing trouble has his thread locked then you are completely disallowing a poster from engaging in a topic. That is wrong. You no longer have a forum when that happens.
If the person who starts the thread with intentions of civil discourse has his thread locked then that is very bad.
To be perfectly honest, I believe you underestimate the number of people willing to try to make people shut up so they can have their say and not be challenged.
But, to reiterate a point, if you don't let people have their say, then it isn't a forum.
But, multiple threads on the same topic are not allowed. Other threads would not be allowed to cover the same topic.
And everything follows from this one questionable rule, that already is only marginally enforced at absolute best. Get rid of the rule, and the 'bad stuff' you fear can't happen. In its place becomes the possibility of having 4 threads on sort of the same topic at a time...and again, so what, little different than what we have now, when such threads aren't shut down by 'such folks'.
To be perfectly honest, I believe you underestimate the number of people willing to try to make people shut up so they can have their say and not be challenged.
To be completely sincere, I believe you overestimate how bad having a few threads on sort of the same topic would be. Additionally, I believe in all truthfulness that you underestimate how bad it's gotten here. While I've had several intelligent discussions via private messages, any public discussion pretty much needs to be taken to another site, or risk being assaulted by the troop.
But, to reiterate a point, if you don't let people have their say, then it isn't a forum.
Agreed completely, which is why the velvet rope thing is a good idea, instead of what we have now, where 'dissent' is shouted down and shut down in a manner that prevents folks from having their say.
Giving thread only bans are an option that are available at some of the other sites I've been to. Places that are larger and more hot-bed than this one, and they seem to do well. Of course there needs to be the option of report the OP for thread ban abuse.
There would definitley need to be a way to report or combat thread ban abuse. If they were to give thread initiators ban power, I would definitely expect some kind of oversight to occur. Perhaps even communication with the moderators to let them know why a person was banned. And likely examples of their bad behaviour quoted from the thread.
But, multiple threads on the same topic are not allowed. Other threads would not be allowed to cover the same topic.
Actually I don't believe the rules state that. I think what you are referring to is the rule that you can't spam multiple forums with the same thread. Even then, minor crossposting is usually acceptable if it's reasonable to assume the followers of different forums would have different discussions about the same topic. It is also appropriate for the VCLs to have multiple threads on the same topic merged when a push button topic crops up. This keeps down on the flooding, and prevents trolls from running rampant in more than one thread.