oh the irony

[The Eva Monkey]

...talking about that frustrating animated series Neon Genesis Evangelion...

Yeah, whatever happened to that?

[Crystal Wolf]

I seem to recall an awful lot of discussion about how threads should be completely sequestered off and going off-topic is a general no-no. Well, this is the mod feedback forum, and discussing Evangelion here is quite off-topic.

[Mr. Tines]

discussing Evangelion here is quite off-topic.

Exactly. So, discussing NGE would involve making more posts in other parts of this board and far fewer here.

[esselfortium]

Exactly. So, discussing NGE would involve making more posts in other parts of this board and far fewer here.

I don't believe discussion has ceased in any other parts of the forum as a result of this thread.

This is honestly just getting really bizarre. The criticisms raised are discredited as whining until I link back to some straightforwardly constructive ones, then that gets ignored in favor of telling us we should just not be talking about this stuff at all, apparently. :-\

[NemZ]

Fine, let's pull this apart and see what's really being said...

Suggestion #1: Pull troublesome posts out of a thread.

I immagine in many cases this isn't feasible because the inappropriate stuff gets mixed in with the actual content, and even when it's been done that way in the past often the problem just continues as if the old posts are still there because everyone who read them remembers perfectly well what was just said. In such cases the mods typically drop in with a warning and only lock the thread if the warning goes unheeded. Makes sense, yes?

The only exception to this tends to be when a thread goes wrong right from the start and doesn't seem likely to lead anywhere good, in which case an immediate lock saves everyone a lot of trouble. Usually it's perfectly obvious why this happens, but if you don't know a PM will probably get you an easy explanation.

Suggestion #2: Mods shouldn't be so darned mean

There's probably some merit to this... but by the same token, if you need to be reprimanded you don't deserve to be treated with kid gloves.

Also, it's often rather amusing to watch a mod come down on some hapless fool. Oh yes, I loves me some Schadenfreude.

Suggestion #3: Don't treat us like children

The mods don't drop those little reminders until after someone's already started behaving childishly. Hence the warning.

So, did I leave anything important out?

Also, most of you are quite lucky the staff is so patient. I'd have booted several of you out for various reasons long before now were it in my power, so be glad the staff are more inclined to snark than wrath and that they have the wisdom not to let jerks like me hold sway. I know I appreciate it; if they were more like me I probably wouldn't be here now either.

[esselfortium]

I think you've grossly oversimplified and misrepresented some points, but I need to grab something to eat and don't feel like retyping everything I and everyone else said yet again.

Also, most of you are quite lucky the staff is so patient. I'd have booted several of you out for various reasons long before now were it in my power

I assure you, the feeling is mutual.

[AchtungAffen]

I would add the rule for mods #4: DONT LOCK.

I mean, what do you accomplish by locking a thread? To put a hold on a discussion that will (if it has its own merit) pop back again and again?

I don't think that there being too many rules makes the forum unruly. The rules are mostly OK IMO, except for this:

A thread may be locked if the staff deems it to be inappropriate for whatever reason. Those that have gone irretrievably off-topic, gotten hopelessly out of hand, or lost all sense of purpose are also at risk. Warnings may or may not be issued in advance; users are adviced to heed "Back on topic, bitches" (or some variation thereof) whenever it appears.

Thread locks are, for all intents and purposes, irreversible. If a thread is locked, do not create a new thread attempting to "reprise" it. Please do not attempt to "appeal" to the staff unless you have an exceptional or heavily persuasive reason for doing so.

In instances where an initially valid topic was closed for "losing its way", a new thread may be created after an adequate "cool down" period. Use common sense when attempting to resurrect discussions that have "suffered the mods’ wrath".

So,according to this there is no standard for thread locking except whim. Also, that whim includes locking and not explaining why, not even saying a damn thing. Those locks on whim and without notice are also "irreversible". And the belief of "losing its way" for any topic, based on a whim, without warning will lock that thread irreversibly.

There's lots of wrong with that.

First, the idea that topics lose their way and the way to mend that is to close them. If a thread had no real purpose or meaning, it will get off topic. If a topic has lived its usefulness it will get off topic. Does that mean that locking it will make things better? I don't think so. Not only that it doesn't mend the ways of that thread, but also might create the situation we're experiencing now with this own thread. Why not letting those threads live until nobody posts in them? If you want to keep one topic in a thread separated from off topicness you can always split threads and ready, no problems there I guess.

Second, there needs to be a standard, a real one, for mods locking threads. Locking a thread should be the last resource if things get really (AND I MEAN REALLY) out of hand, and I believe that even then, locks should be temporary and probably never "for ever". No standard, means whim. And we all can be assholes on a whim. And hey, this goes for SSD (I guess she was the one who said it), mods don't always put the reason why they lock, not even quoting the rules. What rules can they quote when there are no standards for this sort of thing?

Third, irreversible and no appeal. Considering that there are no standards for locking threads, an appeal process is very much a logical choice of order. That way you can mend your ways on a locked thread when a mod had a "bad day".

[The Eva Monkey]

Third, irreversible and no appeal. Considering that there are no standards for locking threads, an appeal process is very much a logical choice of order. That way you can mend your ways on a locked thread when a mod had a "bad day".

It's fine as it is. It's saying "have a good reason, otherwise it stays locked". It would be totally pointless if all you had to do was ask nicely. Also, we don't have the time to explain and detail our every action, so the line needs to be in the sand on that one.

[ran1]

That point is basically empowering you people to be uncourteous to the posters who keep this forum vibrant with discussion, and its elitist as all hell. What's more, the lack of apology in that statement just makes it seem all the more pronounced.

[Mr. Tines]

We can delete your posts, lock your threads and ban your asses any time we decide to. That's what the various privilege levels on the board amount to. All the rules can ever realistically say is "but we won't do it just because we can"; and no amount of bitching will change that harsh reality.

Of course there's nothing stopping anyone who dislikes that setting up a discussion forum of your own where you get the power (and all the scut-work that goes along with it).

[ran1]

At what point did I say I wanted to set up my own forum?
If anything, even my nomination of ModBrik was tounge in cheek.
This is a feedback forum, but you all get so emotional and confrontational over feedback I am starting to think you all are masochists.

[The Eva Monkey]

That point is basically empowering you people to be uncourteous to the posters who keep this forum vibrant with discussion, and its elitist as all hell. What's more, the lack of apology in that statement just makes it seem all the more pronounced.

It's not empowering us to be discourteous, it's because we don't see the need in thread locks being open to discussion. It does permit appeal with effort and thought:

Please do not attempt to "appeal" to the staff unless you have an exceptional or heavily persuasive reason for doing so.

No, it's not elitist. Sometimes we feel something isn't going anywhere productive anytime soon, and we elect to close a thread. It's not saying "it's not good enough for us", it's simply saying that it's unsatisfactory, or below average, or disruptive in some way. If we see a thread where two people are in a heated argument of bumper cars, THAT WILL GET LOCKED. I'm sorry, but it's not a forum discussion at that point.

Also, since when do we need to apologize for locking threads? We make a judgment call, and if you disagree with it, you do something other than this. Send a politely worded email to the EG admin email address, and we'll all get it, and someone should respond in due time. I get the emails, I can confirm to you YES, people do get responses. People do not get purposely ignored. Have you ever tried emailing the admin email? Because so far it seems to me like all you do is vent this out in public.

[email protected]

Simply identify a specific thread, or specific issue, and you will receive a reply in time. Occasionally, it needs to go through some discussion in the admin forum.

[Mr. Tines]

At what point did I say I wanted to set up my own forum?

Not in so many words -- but if you think you know how to do the job better than we do, then by god, go do it and show us a live example working.

[ran1]

My "public venting" seems to addressing the problems that posters other than myself (Essel, Achtung, CC, Crystalwolf, etc.). Is the point of using the admin email so that you can be even more discourteous because it's in private? Well, no, wait, it's hard to be more assinine than what has been going on recently.

In all honesty, I'm pretty much done here (giving feedback that none of you can seem to handle for whatever ego-preserving reason.) It's more than obvious that this forum is no democracy, of course, but that doesn't make it right to harass posters because you hold some sort of intangible internet powers.

Like I said, I've made my statements, proved my points, and said all I have to say on this subject. If you feel the need to masturbate on this topic anymore, by all means go ahead. Lock it and make some witty statement to the effect of "Ran's an asshat and he should die". By all means.

In any event, from this point on I'll enjoy the self-moderated film forum for as long as I am able, and get back to the wiki. I've been neglecting my duties there (the friggin three articles that I still need to clean up are evidence of that). It's more than obvious that the overmoderation cancer is doing irrevocable damage here, and just like in Huxley's Brave New World, the general posters seem to be okay with it. I'd be thrilled if it works itself out, I really do, but I'm not particularly hopeful.

I can safely call this revolution a bust for a time being

[esselfortium]

Not in so many words -- but if you think you know how to do the job better than we do, then by god, go do it and show us a live example working.

Well, the lack of name recognition along with the wiki and other similar hosted stuff here would make it a bit difficult to get something going, but...>_>

[Sachi]

I would also like to add that generally the only discussions that are locked are the ones where people discussing within may have some reason to get heated, such as with the various religion threads, or any other threads that hold some sort of controversial topic. Typically, Eva discussions don't get locked, since there are several topics you can't avoid; locking an Eva topic means that nobody can discuss that topic, which is against what this forum is about. Usually Eva discussions are simply given a cool-down period, or a new thread is created completely. However, there's generally little reason to lock Eva discussion, so this doesn't happen quite often.

The majority of locked threads* are spam threads, off-topic threads or threads where things get hostile. Spam threads are usually easily defined, and can be dealt away; they're also usually never discussion topics. Off-topic threads are a bit trickier, since mods do try to encourage posters to return to the topic, either by making a public warning, or by split-locking the off-topic posts; this doesn't always work, however, and sometimes a thread become so forgone that it becomes better to lock it, and perhaps try again in the future with a new thread. And being a long time poster here myself, I seriously doubt that there are many topics that aren't given a second chance sooner or later.

* Keep in mind that I said majority. I understand this is not always the case, and that there are always exceptions.

[Mr. Tines]

I don't believe discussion has ceased in any other parts of the forum as a result of this thread.

No, but certain posters have contributed more posts to this thread than they have to any other entire forum on this board.

[ran1]

I'm sorry -- but since when is frugality in posting a bad thing?

[The Eva Monkey]

It's more than obvious that this forum is no democracy

No. It never was. It was a dictatorship when it was Eva Monkey Forums, and it became an oligarchy when it became Eva Geeks Forums. It was never at any point a democracy, nor was it advertised as one. We will take constructive feedback, but you aren't entitled to a vote, or a say in how the forum operates.

Is the point of using the admin email so that you can be even more discourteous because it's in private? Well, no, wait, it's hard to be more assinine than what has been going on recently.

I think we're done here.

If you have any comments you would like to relay to the staff, I suggest you compose them as an email, and email it to:

[email protected]

We will read them, and we will respond to them in time, as we have for other users in the past. This does not need to continue as a public spectacle any further.