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.

Hi there. I have been a longtime lurker, who have enjoyed reading all sorts of posts on this site. Recently I have been very interested in #Gamergate, and two threads have been especially interesting to me, supplying me with good links to articles and videos. I am talking about the Sarkeesian and the 5 Guys threads.

These threads have now been closed after some (in my opinion) questionable moderation. In both cases, it was mostly due to a few of the same people (purposefully?) steering the discussion offtopic and getting the threads closed. Apparently super easy to do if you really want to.

Now here's my questions regarding the moderation:

1) Why did the moderators not crack down on the actual people derailing the discussion, instead of punishing ALL the people wanting to share/receive information on these hotbutton topics?
2) How is it even possible to get a thread closed due to "going offtopic" in the Offtopic Forum!!?

As I mentioned, I've been a longtime lurker here, quietly supporting Dakka, but I am not sure I can do that anymore. I find the moderation in these cases to be, at best, questionable, at worst, more akin to censorship. I hope you reconsider and in the future punish the actual perpetrators instead of punishing everybody.


Best regards.

headshakinglybad wrote:

2) How is it even possible to get a thread closed due to "going offtopic" in the Offtopic Forum!!?

The site rules regarding thread topics don't change just because we're allowed broader topics down here.

If you have an issue with the mods you should take it up with Yakface. He loves to hear about how his mods are doing.
Mods are people. Deal.


In before lock

Moved to Nuts & Bolts which is the appropriate section for this kind of thread.

headshakinglybad wrote:
1) Why did the moderators not crack down on the actual people derailing the discussion, instead of punishing ALL the people wanting to share/receive information on these hotbutton topics?

For myself, sometimes it is a lack of time to deal with each person involved (as Frazzled said, we are people with jobs and responsibilities, too). But sometimes, a thread is just too far gone to save... in that case, it is usually fine to start up a new replacement thread in a few days that serves the same purpose, but without whatever content/arguments/etc which caused the other thread to be closed. A good idea is to just PM the mod who closed the thread asking about doing this if you're unsure (so far, I have never said no to such a request unless the thread topic itself wasn't suited to Dakka).

headshakinglybad wrote:
2) How is it even possible to get a thread closed due to "going offtopic" in the Offtopic Forum!!?

Threads in that section still are subject to Dakka's Code of Conduct, the second rule of which is "Stay On Topic". Even in the OT area (which implies that non-wargaming things can be discussed) there are thread topics- it's not "anything goes" for someone to say whatever they like about anything in any thread!

If anything here isn't clear, I would love to discuss it more. We do take feedback onboard, and while I didn't deal with those particular threads, as I said if I locked a thread because it was too far gone in the past, I almost always allow a person to start up a replacement thread in a certain amount of time, as long as the thread itself is fit for Dakka.

Alright, thanks for the replies and clarification.

I would like to add though, that I think the mods should try (and I stress try, as I respect they aren't perfect and have limited time) to keep an eye out for the same troublemakers, on BOTH sides, if a thread on the same topic get started up again in the future.

Thanks in advance and apologies for my outburst.

No need to apologize - all feedback is welcome as there is no knowledge that is not power!

 Alpharius wrote:
No need to apologize - all feedback is welcome as there is no knowledge that is not power!

You and Tides aren't sounding convincingly fascist enough.

 RiTides wrote:
sometimes, a thread is just too far gone to save...

QFT.

Threads have life cycles. Most die peacefully, sinking down into the depths. But sometimes euthanasia is required. The last few pages of such threads are generally off-topic, spammy, rude or some combination. To use another metaphor, the thread has become a toxic environment and locking it is equivalent to quarantine.

So far, we have never banned a specific topic of conversation so posters are free to eventually start new threads on the same topic. But immediately starting a new thread to carry on the same shenanigans will just result in another lock and probably include suspending the user. Locking a thread is a kind of public moderator warning, after all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Platuan4th wrote:
You and Tides aren't sounding convincingly fascist enough.

People often get the government they deserve.

Speaking personally as a moderator, I don't worry much about threads in the OT Forum wandering off their topic as long as the discussion remains polite and entertaining.

Like the other mods I rely to a considerable degree on user alerts to spot shenanigans, malarkey, monkey business and/or giddy goat acting because I can't read everything so I tend to notice only things in the areas in which I am interested.

Huh. A Locked thread that I didn't even participate in. How about that.

In the particular case the OP is most likely talking about the thread was nowhere near dead but a particular user continually derailed the thread, probably in an attempt to get it locked, which that user has now probably succeeded in.

 cincydooley wrote:
Huh. A Locked thread that I didn't even participate in. How about that.

Sorcery!

As long as you toe the party line you will be fine OP. If you don't toe the party line and come across as being even slightly abrasive you will be moderated. Don't get into arguments with crybaby posters.

Couple of those locked threads either went way OT into the point of lunacy, or very nearly broke all of the Dakka forum rules. I feel it's less the mods punishing everyone, and more stopping pointless/offensive conversation.

 trexmeyer wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
Huh. A Locked thread that I didn't even participate in. How about that.

Sorcery!

As long as you toe the party line you will be fine OP. If you don't toe the party line and come across as being even slightly abrasive you will be moderated. Don't get into arguments with crybaby posters.

Dakka is one of the less harshly moderated miniature wargames forums from what I gather. Frankly unless you break Rule #1, which some people seem to be straining at the leash to do, you'll probably be fine. In regards to Off-Topic locks well that's usually up to a Mod's discretion but is it really worth complaining about? If a thread has a lot of traffic it can be 17 pages in less than a day easily and the chances it'll go off-topic are high and like Jreilly said, it's less a punishment and more just crushing spam under the reletnless heel of the Modquisition.




Or it's fascist mods.

Could be either.

 trexmeyer wrote:

As long as you toe the party line you will be fine OP. If you don't toe the party line and come across as being even slightly abrasive you will be moderated. Don't get into arguments with crybaby posters.

The 'party line' is simply to be polite.

It's a little sad that should even need to be a rule to begin with.

A better policy than 'Don't argue with crybabies' is simply to be mindful of the fact that you're in a social environment with people from different backgrounds and age groups, and with different experiences and opinions to your own, and behave appropriately for that situation.

Then we wouldn't need to enforce that draconian 'party line'.