http://stargatewars.herebegames.com/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=153

[papa~smurf]

would the ombudsmen please look in to this
understand that it may still be debated as i type by mods, but seems to be violation of users right to close threads.

the facts
originator asked for thread to be lock

it was locked

user wanted it open, for there own reasons

a debate happen in mod forum

thread was reopen with out approval or knowledge of originator


My questions to admin on procedural issues

Any one can reopen a thread because they have some thing to say ?


is it admin position that the originators of threads are to be lock out of process cause they don't have mod power, let alone be asked for clarification of thier issue with there thread ?

thank u for your time

[Jim]

I have read said debate and understand what happened though I believe it would be better explained by a mod or GM. So I will let them have their say.

[papa~smurf]

well jim, if u have an understanding of this, and how it relates to the rights of the users, please tell us

cause i got like 3 topics i would like to post in that are now locked and the nights not young (j/K)

and i bet u i can find a mod to unclock them for me

[Empy]

Your link doesn't work. I'm not sure what topic you're referring to.

[papa~smurf]

viewtopic.php?f=68&t=153

[spoiler]just spoke with mezz lol said if u would not let him close it, would not let him delete, he just change the name
it like an Easter egg hunt now lo

Earendil has said authors dont have the right to have their own threads closed, and there is no delete button. So I changed the thread name to

[/spoiler]


was just explained to me that one issue was

that war threads no longer become the right of the originator, but to all the posters

this has in the past never been true, many war threads are shut down simply because they no longer wished to air in the forum. One party has the right to start a new thread. I know u say this violates the multiple war thread rule, how ever, one can stay parma locked (ea server war threads 1,2,3 )

but there already was an avenue for posting.........

viewtopic.php?f=68&t=153569&hilit=dde+vs+the+forgotten+ones&start=150


the question of originators rights are being completely abandoned here. Yes it's an open free speech issue, that by starting a topic, any topic, u start free speech

but one dose not have the right to tell the originator when not to talk do they ? Any more than the originator can stop a new topic, or close that.

[deni]

would the ombudsmen please look in to this
understand that it may still be debated as i type by mods, but seems to be violation of users right to close threads.


the facts
originator asked for thread to be lock

it was locked

user wanted it open, for there own reasons

a debate happen in mod forum

thread was reopen with out approval or knowledge of originator


My questions to admin on procedural issues

Any one can reopen a thread because they have some thing to say ?


is it admin position that the originators of threads are to be lock out of process cause they don't have mod power, let alone be asked for clarification of thier issue with there thread ?

thank u for your time

Locking threads is not a prerogative of the users but of the mod team. Mods do decide themselves if a thread should be locked or not. Threads are closed in the following circumstances:

• irrelevance of the topic in the section where it was posted
• large amount of spam/off-topic posts made in a short period of time
• the general discussion of the conversation has changed from it's original intent

None of this includes the author's wishes although of course they are taken into consideration.

Further, in the Galactic Colloseum it is common practice to lock threads once the ingame conflict is over or/and all participating sides agree that the thread should be locked. The later has been the case with the server war threads.

[Juliette]

Locking threads is not a prerogative of the users but of the mod team. Mods do decide themselves if a thread should be locked or not. Threads are closed in the following circumstances:

• irrelevance of the topic in the section where it was posted
• large amount of spam/off-topic posts made in a short period of time
• the general discussion of the conversation has changed from it's original intent

None of this includes the author's wishes although of course they are taken into consideration.

Further, in the Galactic Colloseum it is common practice to lock threads once the ingame conflict is over or/and all participating sides agree that the thread should be locked. The later has been the case with the server war threads.

I hereby confirm this is indeed the way things are supposed to be handled, and exactly what caused the thread to be unlocked again.

Your better half could have told you this too, without the need for a thread.

[RepliMagni]

I am kind of curious about this....I'm sure there is precedence for wanting a war thread locked before the war has ended, and lets face it, that thread wasn't exactly pretty at times......

I just did a very quick forum search of "lock", and on the first three pages there are a whole stream of author's requesting topics locked, of mods making sure the originator wants their thread locked, of examples where the wish of the originator is clearly given precedence......

In the rules it states: "In each case of locking or moving topics, then the original author, as the topic 'owner'..." In the GC rules there is nothing about a topic becoming property of the wider community, and then a little note that "The general forum rules apply." Surely in this case Mezz is still the topic owner, even if it is a war thread, and has the right to request it being locked?

[Zeratul]

he does have the right to request it yes, but the right does not always mean that it will always happen...

[RepliMagni]

he does have the right to request it yes, but the right does not always mean that it will always happen...

Fair enough. So, in this specific case, why was it locked and then re-opened?

[Juliette]

he does have the right to request it yes, but the right does not always mean that it will always happen...

Fair enough. So, in this specific case, why was it locked and then re-opened?

A slight misunderstanding.

[RepliMagni]

A slight misunderstanding.

Illuminating as always

[papa~smurf]

the thread is the originators ownership thou. This is shown in the ability to change the "name' hence the direction and conversely, the content.


once a thread is made,it become the property of the whole of the community? If this is the case, then no thread should be closed till all who have posted in it say that they are done posting.

U are removing authorship rights from the originator here.

The power of mods should not be so board as to decide what stays open and what closes based on there "personification" and against the originators/users wish. Agreeably, some threads become out of hand, and mods need to close them, The author in this case believe that to be the case, and hence the request to close it. Fair enough that the "powers that be" decided that it should be reopen, after a cooling down, however, i believe that that ok should only have come form the originator.

And believe strongly that mod should not have the right to reopen threads with out the written expressed ok of the author.

This is a bigger issue than just this thread.

this is about the users right to say some thing, and let it drop.

THIS IS ABOUT FREE SPEECH

and every user of these boards should have an opinion on this, cause it really effects u all.

Who fed you the Information about the debate in the mod section?

i received it in a PM from some one . If admin wish to inverage, please PM me for details.


Question for admin/ombus

who changed the thread title

author wished it to be change
it is his right ?

[deni]

If this is REALLY about free speech, why do you want that a single person - namely the one who started the topic - to be able to de facto close all discussion on a topic and thus take the very same freedom of free speech away from the rest of the community?


Because this is what will happen, when you do allow the topic starters to decide singlehandly on whether their topic is to remain open or not.


How would you react if I made a topic on say the new alliance update admin is about to bring out and decide to close it just because I feel like it? It would be my right as a topic starter.

But at the same time I would take away the ability of the community to discuss said update as the forums allows only one thread per topic?

You do really want that to happen? Is that your vision of free speech? A single person deciding on a whim what the community can discuss and what not?

I do not know about you, but it is certainly not mine.

[Almost38]

Last edited by deni on Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:20 am, edited 5 times in total.
title change


so now its ok for mods to change thread titles lol and imo i dont think a DDE memeber should be modding his own war thread