Locking it would prevent me from further contributing to a conversation - effectively forcing me to either not voice what I want, or finding another way to voice it (in this case, start a new thread with the same topic continued). The latter of which would just make me look like a douchebag, and agitate people. Both of which are deterrents to me voicing my opinion.
In this way it's both outright and indirect censoring.
Locking it would prevent me from further contributing to a conversation - effectively forcing me to either not voice what I want, or finding another way to voice it (in this case, start a new thread with the same topic continued). The latter of which would just make me look like a douchebag, and agitate people. Both of which are deterrents to me voicing my opinion.
In this way it's both outright and indirect censoring.
Mark
nobody is entitled to say what ever they want here, and people who constantly re open topics from banned threads get banned
I want to be clear that you are not saying there should be no limit to how bad thread can be before a mod steps into lock it? or is that what youre saying?
nobody is entitled to say what ever they want here, and people who constantly re open topics from banned threads get banned
I want to be clear that you are not saying there should be no limit to how bad thread can be before a mod steps into lock it? or is that what youre saying?
Pretty much - I don't think threads should be locked.
Locking it would prevent me from further contributing to a conversation - effectively forcing me to either not voice what I want, or finding another way to voice it (in this case, start a new thread with the same topic continued). The latter of which would just make me look like a douchebag, and agitate people. Both of which are deterrents to me voicing my opinion.
In this way it's both outright and indirect censoring.
Mark
Re: Bolded. Mark, you are like the ending of Thelma and Louise. Even if you recognized a deterrent to you voicing your opinon, you'd just haull ass through it, and speak your mind anyway.
As for the second portion, I quote Inigo Montoya, "I do not think that word means what you think it does."
Re: Bolded. Mark, you are like the ending of Thelma and Louise. Even if you recognized a deterrent to you voicing your opinon, you'd just haull ass through it, and speak your mind anyway.
As for the second portion, I quote Inigo Montoya, "I do not think that word means what you think it does."
Never saw the flick - probably something to do with GTA's option of needing a woman...
But deterrent's don't work anyways :P And I do speak my mind - wish more people did too.
FFS - this is not a democracy here. If you want a forum where threads never gets locked, go buy your own domain and start your own forum.
Compuease has asked for nothing in return for his hard work of cleaning up the forum, getting rid of spammers, he doesn't need to deal with bullshit like this whether thread-locking is allowed or not. Furthermore, its not like he's trigger happy with locking threads, so leave him alone
Forum is owned by an independent owner and if there is material that will hurt the community and profitability of the forum, the mods/admins have the power to act as they see fit for the benefit of the forum as a whole.
While no doubt the OP to that "other" thread had it coming, posts asking to be made fun of, there needs to be a line. If there are no new members joining, what good is it for someone to continue to pay for the domain and servers.
Is that individual chained to a chair with his eyes pinned open and the refresh button regularly pressed?
Cause that would be wrong.
This is likely the heart of my discomfort.
You don't like someone on this site, you can click "ignore", you don't want to participate in a thread, you don't have to respond, you don't want to see what's being said, don't click on it.
Fact is, you have to ACTIVELY seek out topics in these forums, it's not like they're thrown at you.
You don't like someone on this site, you can click "ignore", you don't want to participate in a thread, you don't have to respond, you don't want to see what's being said, don't click on it.
Fact is, you have to ACTIVELY seek out topics in these forums, it's not like they're thrown at you.
Mark
lets apply a child posting a threatening status on their facebook to that, or a berating status. It doesn't actively seek out the victim....but it needs to stop
Mark has a point, thread locking is a FORM of censorship. Every human being on this planet has a right to speak/post their mind. The problem I see is when peoples opinions start to become malicious and are voiced for no other reason then to inflict/hurt others. As we all know, often in life it's not what you're saying but how you're saying it. I WELCOME debate on any subject that I feel strongly about. If nothing I will learn more about the other debater and their "spin" on the issue. I've met comp and wes (wes briefly) and both seem like normal guys. I can't see either one sitting around waiting to lock up threads at the first sign of inappropriateness. This is a business Mark, If I owned a store and you came in and dropped your pants, You would be leaving pretty quick. (but thats not something you would do right Is that considered censorship? Pretty sure there was recent court case concerning this very issue and to quote the presiding judge "those who live in glass houses DO have to put up curtains" All in all this thread makes me smile, so good to see others engaged in a passionate debate. So...I'm gonna go out on a limb and say I'm with mark. Threads should not be locked unless there are clearly abusing people or privileges. Just my opinion, nothing less nothing more
And wtf is darb saying?!?! His post have more twist turns than a Cubby Checker record
I've met comp and wes (wes briefly) and both seem like normal guys.
i always pictured comp as wearing a giant cowboy hat. i think he's usually shirtless and hairy too. one of those old guys who are always washing their driveway with a hose.
. So...I'm gonna go out on a limb and say I'm with mark. Threads should not be locked unless there are clearly abusing people or privileges. Just my opinion, nothing less nothing more
And wtf is darb saying?!?! His post have more twist turns than a Cubby Checker record
Comments
Nobody complains when a spammer gets banned. That's censorship isn't it?
what can I say, I was in my judge dredd state of mind today
You're right, you're wrong . . .
Whoa!
A reasonable response!
Mark
Locking it would prevent me from further contributing to a conversation - effectively forcing me to either not voice what I want, or finding another way to voice it (in this case, start a new thread with the same topic continued). The latter of which would just make me look like a douchebag, and agitate people. Both of which are deterrents to me voicing my opinion.
In this way it's both outright and indirect censoring.
Mark
You keep making locking a thread seem so appealing.
I want to be clear that you are not saying there should be no limit to how bad thread can be before a mod steps into lock it? or is that what youre saying?
Oh you just missed your afternoon nap!
Mark
Pretty much - I don't think threads should be locked.
Mark
Re: Bolded. Mark, you are like the ending of Thelma and Louise. Even if you recognized a deterrent to you voicing your opinon, you'd just haull ass through it, and speak your mind anyway.
As for the second portion, I quote Inigo Montoya, "I do not think that word means what you think it does."
Never saw the flick - probably something to do with GTA's option of needing a woman...
But deterrent's don't work anyways :P And I do speak my mind - wish more people did too.
Mark
lol... you must have missed the thread where I was posting first world problems.
Mark
So, if someone just calls you a douchebag you'll stop voicing your opinion? Or do we in fact have to make you appear to be one?
Both are possibilities and reasonable requests.
Compuease has asked for nothing in return for his hard work of cleaning up the forum, getting rid of spammers, he doesn't need to deal with bullshit like this whether thread-locking is allowed or not. Furthermore, its not like he's trigger happy with locking threads, so leave him alone
Forum is owned by an independent owner and if there is material that will hurt the community and profitability of the forum, the mods/admins have the power to act as they see fit for the benefit of the forum as a whole.
While no doubt the OP to that "other" thread had it coming, posts asking to be made fun of, there needs to be a line. If there are no new members joining, what good is it for someone to continue to pay for the domain and servers.
Haha... zero chance my friend, zero chance
Mark
Nope
Though I sincerely doubt that it would have much legs without someone to play back and forth with.
Also, "Scumbag Steve" was my favorite meme of 2010.
Mark
Is that individual chained to a chair with his eyes pinned open and the refresh button regularly pressed?
Cause that would be wrong.
This is likely the heart of my discomfort.
You don't like someone on this site, you can click "ignore", you don't want to participate in a thread, you don't have to respond, you don't want to see what's being said, don't click on it.
Fact is, you have to ACTIVELY seek out topics in these forums, it's not like they're thrown at you.
Mark
hey, i thought mine was reasonable. guess i don't count.
Alright.. you get a cookie too : ) (Musta been reading a lot of them to catch up)
Mark
woohoo!
if i understand what you are saying here then my response is the pp thread was closed becuase it had legs, even though the original person had left
and about the steve thing yes, you enjoy conflict
And wtf is darb saying?!?! His post have more twist turns than a Cubby Checker record
i always pictured comp as wearing a giant cowboy hat. i think he's usually shirtless and hairy too. one of those old guys who are always washing their driveway with a hose.