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 posted a thread asking about dakkanauts in the nyc area after seeing media coverage of a really bad blizzard hitting it. I was wonderi fif we had any members in the area and how they were doing with 2' of snow dropping on them, roads being closed to non vital traffic, etc.

Well, some people started dragging the issue of whether or not humans are affecting climate change into it and another person made a speculation about how long before the thread got locked.,

I never meant for it to be about why there was a blizzard hitting the nyc area, just how it might affect any of our members there. I also never meant for it to be along running thread, just the duration of the blizzard and the dig out. But that doesn't mean i wanted it locked afterwards.

I told people to STFU about the climate change debate as it had nothing to do with the fact the blizzard was there. And from now on if i start a thread on an issue and someone tries to drag lockbait into it i'm going to flat out tell them to STFU on it. I's tired of seeing good threads locked because someone just had to slip some lockbait into it.

I'm not blaming the mods for locking threads that have been poisoned by lockbait, tho i wish they'd just tell the baiters to stop. I do blame the lockbait posters.

So if you drag lockbait into a post i make i'm going to snap at you for it. I hope if/when you run crying to a mod i got mean to you they look at the situation and tell you you had it coming.

Bluntly, creation of a thread doesn't entitle you to ownership of it. There's moderation tools available to you just as there are to everyone, and if a thread descends so fast that locking is the only option then odds are you've unwittingly trodden in some hot topic, learn from it and move on.

If you want total control write a blog.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Bluntly, creation of a thread doesn't entitle you to ownership of it. There's moderation tools available to you just as there are to everyone, and if a thread descends so fast that locking is the only option then odds are you've unwittingly trodden in some hot topic, learn from it and move on.

If you want total control write a blog.

I'm sick of people getting threads locked by dragging lock bait into them. Your attitude is "Don't post then!"

I will post. If people drag lockbait into my posts i will call them out. If you don't like it don't post lockbait in my posts.

Don't call them out, use the moderation tools like I said. Calling them out just exacerbates the situation. Once again, creation =\= ownership and running around playing mini mod telling people what they can talk about is just going to irritate people and probably make the situation worse.

What is and isn't permissable for discussion is fairly well established, if you feel people are veering into that territory then flag their posts and move on, don't pour fuel on the situation.

I know it's beating a dead horse, but maybe the mods should I dunno... actually *DO* something?

They have the tools, they get the reports, but they're so wed to this wishy-washy attitude that even when I report a literal death threat made in a thread nothing is done.

Mentioning something that is settled science and is at least tangentially related to the thread topic should not be considered 'politically controversial' and should not attract moderator action. Posting stupid anti-science conspiracy theories should get your post deleted, though, but still shouldn't result in the thread getting locked.

Mentioning anthropogenic climate change in a thread about extreme weather doesn't seem like something that should ever get a thread locked. Just like mentioning evolution in a thread about whether Tyranids could ever exist in the real world should not get a thread locked.

A bunch of loony extremists refusing to believe settled science doesn't make it a 'controversial' topic. (Note: this isn't directed at anyone in that thread.)

So I don't agree that mentioning climate change is 'lockbait'. If mods are locking threads over it, then that's a moderation issue. You're blaming the wrong people IMO.

I also think that expecting a thread about an extreme weather event not to contain any mention of climate change is just hilariously unrealistic. It's like starting a thread about all these new COVID strains that are popping up but demanding that nobody mentions evolution.

EDIT: The thread you're (presumably) talking about hasn't been locked, nor has a mod posted any sort of warning there, so maybe you don't need to worry.

There is an easy way.
Just report it as it’s off topic.

While it’s mentioned that you cannot control the posts, you can to some degree.
One of the rules here is to keep things on topic.
If people continually drag it off, they need dealing with.

I’m pretty tired of seeing good threads on here locked because the usual people want a debate that has little to no correlation to the topic.

Also, becoming the American Grotsnik does mean the odds have gone *way* up on 'your' threads drifting off topic...

 Alpharius wrote:


Also, becoming the American Grotsnik does mean the odds have gone *way* up on 'your' threads drifting off topic...

That seems a touch unfair to the Mad Dok, Alpharius.

...The Mad Doc does not bother me and I enjoy his posts...

 Dysartes wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:


Also, becoming the American Grotsnik does mean the odds have gone *way* up on 'your' threads drifting off topic...

That seems a touch unfair to the Mad Dok, Alpharius.

I don't think it's intended to be unfair.

MDG often tries to get discussions going in fringe areas and tries his best to start the threads off in a way that won't send them spiraling into an instant lock. Personally I think he and the user base deserve some credit for how long the Conspiracy Theory thread managed to go without a lock. I would never have though that thread could manage as it did, but it did. Lasted awhile and baring a few incidents was mostly tame.

As some above says, some topics are started on the edge and it's not realistic to think the topic won't drift close to lock territory. MDG acknowledges this and tries to make it work anyway. I don't think Alpharius is trying to knock him so much as point out that making threads in a certain vein is a bit of misblaming. That said, I don't disagree that the at times the mod team seems so centered on not 'arbitrating truth' that they give 'total bs' far more validity than it deserves.

The mods are spread too thin to manage effectively. It isn't their fault, there's just too much.

NinthMusketeer wrote:
The mods are spread too thin to manage effectively. It isn't their fault, there's just too much.

It might not be their fault individually, but if the mod team is too small, then the mod team needs to recruit and train new members. Or they need to come up with more effective moderation strategies that work with the number of mods they have, but 'more mods' is probably the easier solution.

Some of the mods just need to actually mod.

It's painfully obvious at times who actually takes their role somewhat seriously and who wonders what those three letter under their username stand for.

It is noticed, and the efforts made by those who make it is appreciated.

 Duskweaver wrote:

NinthMusketeer wrote:
The mods are spread too thin to manage effectively. It isn't their fault, there's just too much.

It might not be their fault individually, but if the mod team is too small, then the mod team needs to recruit and train new members. Or they need to come up with more effective moderation strategies that work with the number of mods they have, but 'more mods' is probably the easier solution.

Eh... its volunteer work. I find it hard to fault them if they can't keep up, if they were getting paid matters would be different.

Perhaps we're using the word 'fault' differently? I don't intend any moral judgement, just that the moderation here is not as effective as it might be.

A volunteer can still perform their role poorly. And it's not some terrible intolerant judgementalism to point it out.

Fair point, phrasing is pretty key here.

Seems like unrealistic expectations of them to be everywhere whenever you need them. Also models are meant to be painted.

 Duskweaver wrote:
Mentioning something that is settled science and is at least tangentially related to the thread topic should not be considered 'politically controversial' and should not attract moderator action. Posting stupid anti-science conspiracy theories should get your post deleted, though, but still shouldn't result in the thread getting locked.

Mentioning anthropogenic climate change in a thread about extreme weather doesn't seem like something that should ever get a thread locked. Just like mentioning evolution in a thread about whether Tyranids could ever exist in the real world should not get a thread locked.

A bunch of loony extremists refusing to believe settled science doesn't make it a 'controversial' topic. (Note: this isn't directed at anyone in that thread.)

So I don't agree that mentioning climate change is 'lockbait'. If mods are locking threads over it, then that's a moderation issue. You're blaming the wrong people IMO.

I also think that expecting a thread about an extreme weather event not to contain any mention of climate change is just hilariously unrealistic. It's like starting a thread about all these new COVID strains that are popping up but demanding that nobody mentions evolution.

EDIT: The thread you're (presumably) talking about hasn't been locked, nor has a mod posted any sort of warning there, so maybe you don't need to worry.

Science is not political. Its incredibly stupid we even have that as an argument.

People baiting the thread is an issue with any forum.

Here is the process:
-Someone brings up scientific point
-Someone else disagrees with the scientific fact for political reasons.

Now stop. This is where the mods should step in and delete that post for violating rule 1. But that doesn't happen, for whatever reasons.

-The first person responds pointing out that the disagreement is political rather than scientific. Others may jump in agreeing.
-Something about political bias, abandoning the discussion at hand.
-Continued back and forth of pointing out the arguments of a certain demographic that shall remain unnamed have no basis in reality. At this point, making a statement of fact has become political, because one side is based entirely outside factual evidence.
-Thread locked.

Let's not kid ourselves about who is as fault here.

It's the whole problem of facts are now politicized.