Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.
De-Commissioned Forum
March 28, 2024, 02:17:27 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Poll
Question:
POLL: Should topic posters be able to lock a topic?
Yes - 0 (0%)
No - 0 (0%)
Total Voters: 0

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: POLL: Should topic posters be able to lock a topic?  (Read 13009 times)
puff of purple smoke
Administrator
Household Name (300+ Posts)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 604



« on: August 28, 2009, 09:53:21 am »

Currently, someone who posts a topic has the option of locking it so no further responses can be made. This happened recently in this thread and caused some confusion.

I am opening this poll and thread as a place to make comments on this feature of the forum. It can be turned off if there is consensus to do so. If nobody really cares either way it will simply remain on.
Logged
EverAStudent
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 716



WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 28, 2009, 10:40:22 am »

I think it is good idea (for now) to allow the creator of a thread/topic to lock it when the thread/topic has outlived its uplifting purpose or has become abused beyond common sense by high-jackers or spammers.

Locking an entire topic that you yourself created is different than censoring individuals.  Everyone can still talk, read, and respond, but when the conversation has ceased being civil or helpful, why not shut it down?
« Last Edit: August 28, 2009, 10:42:28 am by EverAStudent » Logged
MidnightRider
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 302



« Reply #2 on: August 28, 2009, 02:10:13 pm »

I tried to vote but there was an error. I was going to vote NO.

IMHO, it should be up to the Forum's Admin to decide if/when it is time to shut down a topic. I can't see why it would be necessary unless there are some fairly serious violations of netiquette or the forum's ground rules.
Logged
puff of purple smoke
Administrator
Household Name (300+ Posts)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 604



« Reply #3 on: August 28, 2009, 02:26:35 pm »

Wow, I think polls are broken and have actually been broken for quite some time. Nobody noticed until now though. Smiley
Logged
ustawannabee
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 32



« Reply #4 on: August 28, 2009, 03:21:24 pm »

I also tryed to vote and it didnt work. I would have voted yes. I think administrators OR original author should be able to lock.
Logged

Now I am free to be me in Christ!
lone gone
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 279



WWW
« Reply #5 on: August 29, 2009, 07:11:14 am »

I would vote no,  that an originator should NOTbe able to lock his or her own thread.

My reason?  A person could post an inflammatory post and then lock it so that no one can respond. That one abuse alone is enough reason not to allow someone to lock out everyone else.

Who can say when a thread is truly finished. I have seen old/tired threads revived with new vigor after a someone with a new viewpoint adds something.A thread can be moved to the Moribund Equine area if it turns into the same old redundant circular arguments.

This is a public forum. It is supposed to be a public discussion place like Mars Hill, where people of various faiths come together to share their own views, ask clarifiying questions of other people in an attempt to understand them better, and to decide for themselves what is right or not.  Differing viewpoints are to be tolerated, not stifled.
Logged
jaywalker
Obscure Poster (1-14 Posts)
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11



« Reply #6 on: August 29, 2009, 08:11:24 am »

Oh yeah, definately let the original poster lock their own thread, best thing in the world.

It keeps that one or two antagonists from showing up and mobbing a topic. If they know its just gonna get shut down they're more likely to play nice and have a real exchange on the forum.

And if someone who didnt even start the topic thinks a locked up topic should keep going there is nothing stopping them from starting a similar topic all by themselves.

My vote is definately let the topic starter be the topic closer.

Logged
puff of purple smoke
Administrator
Household Name (300+ Posts)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 604



« Reply #7 on: August 29, 2009, 10:56:54 am »

So since the poll code is broken, here is the current tally:

Yes: 3
No: 2
Logged
lone gone
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 279



WWW
« Reply #8 on: August 29, 2009, 11:47:29 am »

There have been 70 views of this thread. There are a lot of people who are not voicing an opinion. I feel that hese people would likely want an anonymous poll to record their vote without having to go on record.
Logged
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2520



« Reply #9 on: August 29, 2009, 12:35:17 pm »

I vote "confused"! Is that an option?!

Unless I am misunderstanding how the system works, if a topic is locked by the person who started the thread, couldn't someone else just continue the discussion by simply starting a new thread and then that person would have the control over the discussion?

Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
jaywalker
Obscure Poster (1-14 Posts)
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11



« Reply #10 on: August 29, 2009, 12:57:50 pm »

Linda posted: Unless I am misunderstanding how the system works, if a topic is locked by the person who started the thread, couldn't someone else just continue the discussion by simply starting a new thread and then that person would have the control over the discussion?

Linda, you are totally correct.

In my mind that means that if a topic is mobbed or 'jacked by guys who are just trying to cheese off someone, then being the owner and closing it down means I can just walk away from the 'jackers. If they "restart" the topic on their own thread, I don't feel I have any skin in their game. Let them rant all day long on their own thread and I don't feel like I have to babysit it or feel any responsibility to try to answer back. 

When I start threads on other forums, I always feel bad if the topic gets 'jacked and all messed up. If I can just lock it then the damage and my responsibility are over. Feels right. 
Logged
theresearchpersona
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 418



« Reply #11 on: August 30, 2009, 08:22:59 pm »

It does sound like a good idea on the one hand. On the other, my personal view is it's interesting what information can be gathered from those guys who keep ranting back-and-forth; gives insights; also, I think Puff has done a fairly good job in the past of dealing with what needs to be, and that in the event of need, he can be contacted.

But more importantly to this poster, is rather that, I think, posts should remain open for those disturbed newcomers who want answers, read through all the threads, post info, opinions, views (good or bad), and thus become known here, and either contribute, or get help/advice, or both; who here can know what may pique that interest, convince somebody of problems or danger or both, and etc.? I certainly cannot.

I'm going to have to vote 'no', although perhaps a 'cool down' lock-up, locking-up a thread for a few days (and displaying a notice) would be good so people can get away to think, and know they needn't reply immediately, and decide whether or not continuing the back-and-forth is worth the time; as stated above, it may not be getting anywhere--but it brings things out, new info, etc.. The back-and-forth with Sam vs. three/four others has drummed-up information worth considering from commentaries, a bunch more history/testimony regarding the details on questions of past events (including just responses to faulty facts), and more. : D Who knows who that will edify? Who knows what is and is not uplifting--sometimes seemingly pointless details, or unessential or miniscule information, is meaningless to us, everything to somebody else: now I'm trying to remember a few such cases I've been thankful to God for towards me, that is, in applying His word in ways I wouldn't know, or using truths to 'force me out of the nest' (out of my comfort, apathy, rebellion, delusions, whatever), whether truths of the word, about the word, or come out of controversies--though honestly (to my shame) I seem to be quite forgetful. : (

A very general example is when I came here, finding so many other individuals who had no idea that had come to the same conclusions, specifically those who took to the word in examining these things, and coming to the same conclusions--was extremely helpful, uplifting, encouraging, etc.. Like God leading us out together, though not at the same times and places, and unaware of one another, and often too immature to really be confident in what we had put our finger on, how we put our fingers on it, and etc.. Or, in the same way, sitting-down with Puff one day over pizza and just talking it out, did the same: comparing our notes, (and not only were we from the same Church, but never knew one another--yet saw the same things happening to our respective groups, like people just randomly disappearing and nobody seemed to be aware of why or care), and being struck by the similarities: and I can gander just from that meeting that though we're like-minded in certain things, in respect to the importance of the truth, regarding Christ, the gospel, and etc., that individually as personalities there's much diversity there: yet still, same conclusions, different ages and experiences, even preferences and opinions--you never know what little bit of info will be good for someone's edification, encouragement, clarification, etc..

p.s. I still can't use the poll either! : )
« Last Edit: August 30, 2009, 08:28:42 pm by theresearchpersona » Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.1.1