Do you think moderators are a bit harsh sometimes when closing a thread?

[Vexen]

Do you think moderators are a bit harsh sometimes when closing a thread?

[StringJunky]

No. I think their collective judgement has been fine-tuned since the beginning of the millennium.

[QuantumT]

I asked almost the exact same question not so long ago.

You need to get the lay of the land. Learn how the rules of conduct is on this site. Where and how to present your case.
If you are smart, you will learn soon enough. But they way you are behaving currently, making threads about this and that constantly, you are obviously seeking confrontation and boundaries. Keep it up, and you will get banned for spamming (or whatever they call it here).
I consider myself a bit of a rebel and a troublemaker, but even I can see that you are pushing it too far.

Edited March 5, 2019 by QuantumT

[Itoero]

1 hour ago, Vexen said:

Do you think moderators are a bit harsh sometimes when closing a thread?

No.

[Sayonara]

You go away for five minutes, and when you come back there's a thread like this which hasn't been closed immediately after a single "no" reply.

What happened here? 

[swansont]

1 minute ago, Sayonara said:

You go away for five minutes, and when you come back there's a thread like this which hasn't been closed immediately after a single "no" reply.

What happened here? 

Not sure if we're getting soft, or senile.

[Sayonara]

Just now, swansont said:

Not sure if we're getting soft, or senile.

Haven't you always been senile?

Or am I thinking of Phi for All. Okay maybe I'm going senile.

[swansont]

6 minutes ago, Sayonara said:

Haven't you always been senile?

Or am I thinking of Phi for All. Okay maybe I'm going senile.

I think Phi is just a hallucination that we all have. 

[peterwlocke]

Nah bruh I found them to be really respectful about it.

5 minutes ago, swansont said:

I think Phi is just a hallucination that we all have. 

how else could Phi be so glorious?

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Sayonara said:

Haven't you always been senile?

Or am I thinking of Phi for All. Okay maybe I'm going senile.

I'm senile, he's soft, I Don't Know is on third. You're coming out of left field, so you must be Why.

We've come a long way from the days when you'd just have someone sanctioned for lipping off to a mod. Nowadays, we let these threads go on so we can gather  compromising intel on the offenders and sell it. 

[koti]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

I'm senile, he's soft, I Don't Know is on third. You're coming out of left field, so you must be Why.

We've come a long way from the days when you'd just have someone sanctioned for lipping off to a mod. Nowadays, we let these threads go on so we can gather  compromising intel on the offenders and sell it. 

So if a group of soldiers walking through enemy territory make a noise, their position might be compromised. Is selling compromising intel of offenders not a completely different meaning of the phrase "to compromise" from the soldier example? Also, why am I having a lot more of that tough, horny skin on my heels lately?

[ydoaPs]

3 hours ago, Sayonara said:

You go away for five minutes, and when you come back there's a thread like this which hasn't been closed immediately after a single "no" reply.

What happened here? 

You may have misspelled "years"

[Sayonara]

14 minutes ago, ydoaPs said:

You may have misspelled "years"

They’re like... galactic minutes 

[swansont]

15 hours ago, ydoaPs said:

You may have misspelled "years"

He was moving very fast. How fast is left as an exercise for the diligent student.

[taeto]

But what have you got as a recourse when a thread in which you try to participate suddenly gets closed? 

You should open a new thread to continue the discussion? It seems unnatural and awkward.

I was in a thread quite recently, in which a poster attempted to discredit the OP by making up stuff with extraordinary claims seemingly out of the blue.

To me it seemed unfair to force the OP to react to made up claims. In addition the claims were, possibly unintentionally but nonetheless, of an insulting nature towards a no longer living scientist, well mathematician, but I tend to make no great distinctions.

The thread got closed before I could object to the unfair treatment of the OP and the inappropriate personal attacks.

Edited March 13, 2019 by taeto

[swansont]

3 hours ago, taeto said:

But what have you got as a recourse when a thread in which you try to participate suddenly gets closed? 

You should open a new thread to continue the discussion? It seems unnatural and awkward.

I was in a thread quite recently, in which a poster attempted to discredit the OP by making up stuff with extraordinary claims seemingly out of the blue.

To me it seemed unfair to force the OP to react to made up claims. In addition the claims were, possibly unintentionally but nonetheless, of an insulting nature towards a no longer living scientist, well mathematician, but I tend to make no great distinctions.

The thread got closed before I could object to the unfair treatment of the OP and the inappropriate personal attacks.

Without telling us what the thread is, there’s no way to comment.

[taeto]

15 hours ago, swansont said:

Without telling us what the thread is, there’s no way to comment.

Okay then, but thanks! I will just open a new thread, I guess that would be the default. I got genuinely curious about the unresolved discussion that was running in the closed thread.

[swansont]

51 minutes ago, taeto said:

Okay then, but thanks! I will just open a new thread, I guess that would be the default. I got genuinely curious about the unresolved discussion that was running in the closed thread.

I was wondering what thread it was, since it sounded like maybe the thread was closed because someone other than the OP was making stuff up. It seems you are referring to "neutrons and gravity" (as implied by the thread you recently started), so I now know that's not the case.

In any event, the proper procedure to complain about unfair treatment is to report the post, which AFAIK, can happen even after the thread has been locked.

The only danger of re-opening a thread that has been closed is that usually the OP is not permitted to continue participating — typically because they are soapboxing, i.e. not responding to inquiries. If there were unresolved issues, they aren't going to be resolved in a new thread. However, if it was a peripheral topic, and not addressed to the OP, then there is no inherent problem with opening up such a thread.

[Phi for All]

4 minutes ago, swansont said:

The only danger of re-opening a thread that has been closed is that usually the OP is not permitted to continue participating — typically because they are soapboxing, i.e. not responding to inquiries.

And so we're clear on this, it's never done because we don't think the topic should be discussed. It's more along the lines of insisting the OP sit down at the table and discuss the idea rather than dancing on top of it with his fingers in his ears during the presentation.

[taeto]

3 minutes ago, swansont said:

I was wondering what thread it was, since it sounded like maybe the thread was closed because someone other than the OP was making stuff up. It seems you are referring to "neutrons and gravity" (as implied by the thread you recently started), so I now know that's not the case.

Yes, that was the thread.

No, it actually seemed to me that someone else than the OP was making stuff up, and the moderator did not intervene with the made up stuff, even though it was pointed out.

The OP certainly had some quirks in that thread, so I cannot disagree with the closing of it. I just wondered how to continue the discussion when you are cut off like that. Because obviously if you have to start a new thread, it becomes a lot of work to repeat all the context and the arguments that were present in the closed thread.

2 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

And so we're clear on this, it's never done because we don't think the topic should be discussed. It's more along the lines of insisting the OP sit down at the table and discuss the idea rather than dancing on top of it with his fingers in his ears during the presentation.

Though in this case it was a fierce opponent of the OP against another opponent to the OP kind of debate. 

[swansont]

2 minutes ago, taeto said:

Yes, that was the thread.

No, it actually seemed to me that someone else than the OP was making stuff up, and the moderator did not intervene with the made up stuff, even though it was pointed out.

This is why reporting is requested — to bring it to our attention. Posting it in the thread is less likely to get anyone's attention than a report.

2 minutes ago, taeto said:

The OP certainly had some quirks in that thread, so I cannot disagree with the closing of it. I just wondered how to continue the discussion when you are cut off like that. Because obviously if you have to start a new thread, it becomes a lot of work to repeat all the context and the arguments that were present in the closed thread.

You can copy/paste quotes. Or provide a link

 

[Samantha Priss]

I notice any threads about how races are not exactly equal get closed by swansont for spurious reasons like "bigotry".

[Phi for All]

7 minutes ago, Samantha Priss said:

I notice any threads about how races are not exactly equal get closed by swansont for spurious reasons like "bigotry".

Some call them "spurious reasons", others call them "the rules you agreed to when you joined".

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

Further discussion about bigotry is off-topic for this thread and has been split off to the trash. Please stay on-topic.

 

[Samantha Priss]

No it was completely on topic.