Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I got this idea that if you made a thread and you dont like the direction it went you should be able to lock it your self.
so if you made a serious thread and it went down the crapper you should be able to lock it
whadda you think

You could always just edit your original post.

I think it's a way of running away from the conversation.

This would be a great idea , considering a certain individual have trolled across 4 wargame boards.

The only reason dakka mods wouldnt do anything about it is because they didnt realize how severe it has been already.

Heh. I know exactly which thread you mean... oh, or it could be that one.

Hmm... Maybe a little more thought before going ahead and whacking up a new topic?

I dont feel that a feature like that would help, if you dont like the convosation edit/remove your posts and stop going there, very simple.

Just because a thread doesnt address what you want doesnt mean it doesnt address anything.

If you really need to lock a thread, contact a mod or just leave

I think I'm with Squig_herder on this one.

Thread locking should be left to the Mods.

People would use it to lock a thread after they've said something and they don't want any replies that disagree with them.

Well, other people would feel compelled to respond in many cases and so would then start a 2nd thread in order to respond.

In short, this 'feature' would end up cluttering the forums more than anything.

What about if the self-lock worked slightly like the alert button. The owner of the thread can press the self lock and it sends an alert to a MOD requesting its closure. Until the MOD clicks yes to it after reviewing it of course, the thread is locked. This might work slightly better than a user IM'ing a specific MOD and waiting for that MOD to close it.

Though I do appriciate (being a programmer myself)that adding all that extra code may not be worth the time and effort when you consider that you go to the home page you can see if MOD's are online to PM.

It would however be useful if you wanted a quicker lock to stop a inflammed trolling as all MOD's would know rather than just the one you PM'ed. And also amazingly, MOD's are human too and need to sleep sometime so may not be online at all, in which case the first MOD online would get the alert for a self-lock.

You are supposed to use the alert mod button already to do that instead of PMing a mod as you'll get a much faster response.

haha, well in that case ignore everything I just said as I didn't realise the Alert MOD was used for locking your own thread, but to alert MOD's to inappropriate postings

Have never needed to have a thread locked before, so made an assumption as all I've seen is posted saying "I've PM'ed the MOD". My bad

Just because you started a thread doesn't mean you should be able to lock it. A thread is a discussion and a group effort, and everyone who contributes has some sort of stake in it. The only reason a thread should be locked, is if rules are being consistently broken in that thread. Just because the original poster wants a thread to be locked, doesn't mean it should be.

You may have posted a thread, but that does not make you the moderator of it, or the final arbiter of that thread's fate or the path the discussion may take.