quote:
I don't like when threads are closed.....I kind-of think that controversial topics are like our behavior in society----most people are respectful while just one or two are not....and they are the ones causing all of the trouble. I try to ignore it, complain a little, and then feel sorry for their families or co-workers....The thread will die a natural death on its own, when the time comes....But otherwise...hey, how many threads are closed, only to re-open with another title?
I don't like when threads are closed either. In my four years here, very few threads have actually been closed. A tiny, tiny percentage of threads are ever moderated even though there are probably good arguments that more of them ought to be.
What are some legitimate reasons for closing threads and/or moderating them?
The truth is words can harm. The government and the Supreme Court have determined that there is no absolute right to say what you want. Oliver Wendall Holmes' famous example "Surely, we can all agree that there is no right to shout fire in a crowded theatre" Obviously, we are not talking about that type of speech here on the hsbbweb.
Some examples of things I will not tolerate (me being an evil moderator)....
1) Posting negative/derogatory information about young ball players. Even here there is a fine line. Sometimes the negative information is public knowledge (in the newspapers) and thus there are valid reasons for discussion. These are the exception however.
2) Spamming/advertising - this is called reaping where you have not sown. Many of us contribute either through time and/or donation to the free operation of this site. That does not give someone the right to freely conduct their business here at the expense of others. Again, there are some borderline cases that are sometimes dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
3) Rudeness/borishness/in-your-faceness/etc - this is where some of the disagreements about moderators come in. Some people call it bluntness and others call it bad manners. The truth is that when someone is rude or questioning of motive, that behavior also acts as a "moderation" of a thread. That is the law of the jungle. Moderation by intimidation if you will. It prevents the free-flow of useful information including legitimate disagreement.
It seems pretty easy to tell when someone has crossed the line. The group will often take the offender to task as demonstrated in this thread. It is not asking people too much to be civil. Disagree until the cows come home - just do it in a civil manner. No one ever said we all have to agree. Would love to hear what Bob Howdeshell's thoughts are on this.
