I'm lost. It doesn't make sense to me.

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

So E, just to get this straight...when do you use the invisible and when do you lock a topic? Are there guidelines or is it just a matter of at the time?

Per the thread I cited:

A post may be edited / removed to remove bad content if:

A person personally attacks another member by using profane language, verbal threats, or other forms of derogatory comments directly at a specific member. This is referring to blatantly derogatory and antagonizing threats, not one made in jest.

Or

If a post involves a person is discussing issues that may cross the line and violate the TOS. Common sense mainly to avoid this.

Or

A post places severe liability on another member, themselves, or the site.

A thread may be locked if:

A topic goes way over the hill and has lost focus and a hopeless argument ensues. In this case please take the argument to another means of communication off this board or use PM’s to discuss your personal issues. Do not create the same topic again.

Or

If a thread has truly ended and then becomes WAY off topic. It is suggested that members create a new topic to continue a discussion. It is confusing when a normal thread gets off topic by 4-5 pages!

[Jenn! 918]

A post places severe liability on another member, themselves, or the site.

What would that be exactly?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

If it fits any of the TOS violations and/or any of my criteria above (which are one and the same really), it'll get closed (after a warning generally).

A post places severe liability on another member, themselves, or the site.

What would that be exactly?

If a member were to use VJ to plot a terror attack or admit they killed their spouse.

Or UPL.

[TracyTN 237]

Seems to me that it's random choice of which threads get closed, or maybe it's based on the popularity, (or pseudo popularity of the posters that have the upper hand in the bickering.

Sorry if that ruffles feathers but that is what is happening.

No feathers ruffling.

I close a thread if a.) insults start flying b.) the OP requests it or c.) it has been started deliberately with the express intent to flame.

No preference, I don't care who the OP is, who the flamers are or who was throwing insults. If it fits any of the TOS violations and/or any of my criteria above (which are one and the same really), it'll get closed (after a warning generally).

I like this.

Too bad this wasn't applied in devilette's UK forum thread. I suppose the other 2 mods don't have the same subjective opinion about OPs requesting a closure. Its closed now but it took a while!

As to point c, what about when the thread has been started with the obvious intent to start bickering?

[rebeccajo 14]

There's a whole lot of effort being spent here defending Moderating when it really isn't necessary.

You all need to learn to differentiate between you are being baited just as much as the rest of the board is being baited.

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

Infinite examples. If someone posts pirated software on the site for example. Maybe if someone posts a death threat. Too many examples to give but you get the idea.

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

There's a whole lot of effort being spent here defending Moderating when it really isn't necessary.

You all need to learn to differentiate between you are being baited just as much as the rest of the board is being baited.

You are right. I think the final answer should be read the TOS, read the Example Guides on Moderation Examples pinned in this thread. Moderators will act accordingly and if someone disagrees (with the rules or a moderation decision) their option is to PM where we can discuss the issue and change policy if they persuade me.

[Fandango 1,439]

There's a whole lot of effort being spent here defending Moderating when it really isn't necessary.

You all need to learn to differentiate between you are being baited just as much as the rest of the board is being baited.

If you ever feel that you are being baited, it doesn't mean you have to rise to the occasion. That's a personal choice, no?

Thanks, E, for the clarification.

[TracyTN 237]

Yes, it is a personal choice. As is choosing to call a spade a spade (when appropriate).

[RaspberrySwirl 20]

::bangs head on keyboard::

[ChasUK 0]

You all need to learn to differentiate between you are being baited just as much as the rest of the board is being baited.

If you ever feel that you are being baited, it doesn't mean you have to rise to the occasion. That's a personal choice, no?

Well apparantly baiting someone is a violation of TOS and demands some form of action. If the bait is set, then I think you have the right to rise accordingly. Why let the one doing the baiting have the last word and feel they have the upper hand in such situations.

I think I have seen many people "bait" you Lisa, rightly or wrongly, but I have never seen you, NOT rise to the occasion.

Edited June 26, 2007 by Gone

[Fandango 1,439]

You all need to learn to differentiate between you are being baited just as much as the rest of the board is being baited.

If you ever feel that you are being baited, it doesn't mean you have to rise to the occasion. That's a personal choice, no?

Well apparantly baiting someone is a violation of TOS and demands some form of action. If the bait is is set, then I think you have the right to rise accordingly. Why let the one doing the baiting have the last word and feel they have the upper hand in such situations.

I think I have seen many people "bait" you Lisa, rightly or wrongly, but I have never seen you, NOT rise to the occasion.

Then you haven't been paying close enough attn

The reason why I say that is I feel it's all personal responsibility. You (generic you here) want to call someone names...go right ahead and do so. But take the responsibility for it and not stand behind 'oh so and so was baiting me'. Its your choice.

Whether or not any threads are started in malice is not the point...it's how they are reacted to that lies with the person doing the reacting. And we can all get along much better once we keep that in mind.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Lisa,

If it helps I could start a thread on how realtors don't add value and you could, you know, ignore it

[Ban Hammer 13,337]

::bangs head on keyboard::

pass the keyboard please

Lisa,

If it helps I could start a thread on how realtors don't add value and you could, you know, ignore it

that would be take 2 of that thread

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

really? i don't recall take 1...