An Observation and a Suggestion for the Mods

During this weekend, there was a thread that brought me a lot of comfort. It went on long enough to let me say the things I wanted to say, and it allowed others, with similar viewpoints, the chance to say what they wished to.

Moreover, the discussion in it from all points of view was heard, and I felt we were making some headway toward mutual understanding.

I noticed also that a number of folks I generally don't hear from in threads similar to this came out of the woodwork to comment. People who normally don't comment much at all came out to say that, in general, many agreed with the outlook presented by me and others.

Now that thread is closed, having apparently "outlived its arguable usefulness."

Actually, I was finding that thread very useful, though I had finished with my own commentary in it some pages back.

It was a good weekend. Freedom of speech held sway.

That this particular thread was allowed to continue unfettered meant that good discourse did occur in it, and we heard from more people than usual.

My suggestion for the mods would be to consider that perhaps all such threads in which people are asking for or discussing freedom of speech and freedom from oppression NOT be closed at the first hint of disagreement.

In practice, this might mean taking care not to close all the threads of particular individuals just because others jump in to disagree voluably.

Allow everyone equal access to speech on these forums.

coco

could it be possible the tread was closed because people were posting images of fat people and monkeys to it?

Until such a time that LL decides it's in the best interest of the ppl to stop one poster from calling the other such things as; "a whore" or "mentally ill" I cannot in good conscious continue to post to the LL forums.

I make this choice for my own person peace of mind, and not what is for the greater good. Simply locking a thread does not make the problem go away.

When we can safely talk about issues in an adult manner I will return to post.

Cat

Ok I am sincerely confused here. Catherine is going to stop posting because, among other things, she has been called a whore. Yet, this is ok?







So it is fine to say that individuals are prositituting themselves and beneath you (aka a whore)? These double standards are the worst part of all of this. This do as I say, not as I do, holier than thou stuff is a part of the problem in these forums that needs to end if we are going to have those vaunted "adult" conversations. If you want to talk about barriers to civility, getting rid of personal hypocrisy needs to be part of it.

From what I read, Cat seems to believe these things are wrong only when 'others' do them.

/120/25/52408/8.html#post554985

Considering this, I suspect her decision to take a vacation is well warranted and ultimately, good for all concerned.

This thread isn't about Catherine. This thread is about closing threads prematurely.

coco

I was responding to Catherine's off topic post - had it not been in this thread, I would have asked the question elsewhere. I agree, there is no rhyme or reason often to how they close threads.

Oh, there's plenty of rhyme and reason, Cristiano. And I object to it.

coco

Object away - I just didn't notice you objecting to her off topic post in the first place. That is exactly what I am talking about.

That is actually not true. Sometimes they will lock threads very quickly, other times they will spiral out of control for days and not be touched. It often seems to correspond to the fact that LL is not really a 7 day a week operation - from Friday to Monday, the forums are a free for all for the most part.

I do agree though that sometimes the definition of what constitutes a useful discussion is flawed. It is lazy to not moderate the thread, and simply lock it when the vast majority of the thread had useful discussion in it.

I need to find someone to write the backend for an automated betting pool that allows users to place bets on the post count range a given thread will reach before being locked by the moderators.

It would make wildcards like the thread this thread is talking about a lot of fun to watch and bet on, while making threads that promise to become continuations of locked threads easy money for a savvy gambler.

In fact, such a tool might be a great asset to Linden Lab, as well. Think of DARPA's proposed securities exchange for terror events. The idea is, if a whole bunch of people start putting money on a given event, that probably means that it's a hot event. This tool could feature an RSS feed to which Linden Lab could (surreptitiously) subscribe. If they start seeing a particular thread being bet on with enormous volume out of the blue, they'd know there was something worth keeping an eye on.

Just an idea.

Yes, I agree with that, Cristiano.

I quite enjoyed the free-for-all this weekend, though. It was free for me and like-minded people to talk.

coco

* sigh * I don't understand why you always do that, honestly. By like minded people, you mean people who agree with Cocoanut? I often agree with you, and often disagree with you. Each person has the ability to talk - what you seem to not want is for certain people to have responsibility for what they say. You will chastise others for certain things, while glossing over the exact same thing from someone who is "like minded".

Really? Clue me in. How is it that a thread that is a personal attack and actually names names in the title is moved to well wishes and greetings? Then left to fester like a wound? There is no rhyme or reason. They have limited moderation resources and moderation can be a hard thing to do.

This is such crap. Are people such Candy asses that as soon as someone questions their idea, envokes logic, or asks for clarification on the topic, the poster runs with their tail between their legs. If people have real strong ideas and believe in them (I think the strong belief is what is lacking) then they can defend their ideas. If they can't then their ideas didn't hold up to the fleshing out. This happens in Corporate America everyday, thank God people don't leave the boardroom crying.

Not sure which you are talking about, Eboni, and no time to look it up now - but I was talking about the thread here in this forum that just got locked.

Cristiano, yes, in this case, by like-minded, I am refering to people who hold the same position as I do on this issue. You could say "those who agree with Cocoanut" or you could say "those who agree with <insert name of any other person with the same view.>"

In any case, the point is, closing threads that aren't doing anyone any harm, and are obviously a topic where a lot of people want to chime in on, is what I would call closing threads unnecessarily.

I have to go clean house now. Cable man coming tomorrow; friend coming this weekend.

coco

P.S. No, Eboni, the point is, you can't defend your views or anything else if the thread gets closed prematurely.

Ok - you said there is rhyme and reason to those closings though - as if they were closed for a particular reason that you are objecting to.

/140/dd/52352/1.html


That one, you posted in it.




People can defend their views in world. Hold and event and have a discussion. If things really mattered to people they would use this method. Then when people piss you off, or disagree with you, you can just kick them from the location.

Okay. Here is where I chime in though.

Cocoanut, you say you liked the thread because "You and likeminded people got to post" (paraphrased, damn forgetting to hit the quote button).

BUT

When likeminded people post, and are sometimes, yes not everytime, sometimes _peacefully_ debating with someone, you jump in and accuse everyone of a mob mentality, you accuse everyone of ganging up on poor *insert name*. When often, it's only been one person who has said something even vaguely insulting.

I'd really like to reconcile what you are perceiving the difference to be between what happened in the locked thread (I did read it) and what happens when people that don't agree with you, but agree with each other post their common opinions and thoughts together.

*shrugs* As I said before, I tend to enjoy your posts cocoanut, but this just stank of some rather rank hypocrisy.

Oh yeah. I think sometimes the locking of a thread is done too soon as well, before useful discussion is dried up. I don't think some off topic posts should close a thread. So I do agree with you there.

That thread was in desperate need of locking just like this one will soon be.

~Ulrika~

I would have predicted the same if not for a wildcard event occuring one or two posts in. We'll see if that sticks, however.

Why, Ulrika? Why was that thread in desperate need of closing?

coco

P.S. And why should this one be?

Katja, the only thing I have in common with Catherine that I know of for sure (as I said before, I don'tknow Catherine) is we both think people should have a right to speak with dignity. To not be called personal names. To not have everyone leap all over you the minute you open your mouth here.

I'm not talking about groups. I'm talking about calling individuals personal, individual names.

When I came into these forums in February, I saw this person named Catherine jumped on all over the place, I believe it was for having a position about some kind of sexy display for Bedazzle - in a way that was totally clearly, to an impartial observer who knew no one on the forums, way out of proportion to what she was ACTUALLY SAYING.

I SAW that. I didn't invent that. I didn't come into this game with any reason to want to stand up for Catherine.

I saw it then; I see it now. It isn't hypocritical for me to be for people to be allowed to speak with dignity on these forums. It has been Prok - but as you know, he is my friend. It was Catherine - obvious to me from the minute I arrived here; and it has been this or that newcomer to the threads, and, of course, myself.

I'm against this. Totally. I have come up with two reforms I think would largely fix most of this.

Now, you may not see any of this what I have seen, Katja, but I see it every day of my life on these forums. To speak against it, therefore, seems not the least hypocritical to me. I am not anxious to keep my right to call others personal names. I'm not perfect. But the fact that some people make almost a sport of it, well, that needs to go. So does the banning rule.

And I still would like to know what was wrong with that thread that got closed.

And what's wrong with this thread? How is it that this thread calls for a lock, too?

coco