PDA

View Full Version : Any reason why this thread was closed?



Frak
December 20th, 2010, 02:36 AM
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1649104

It doesn't break the CoC (at least I don't think it does), and was created only in safe fun. It seems the mods/admins read it as a complaint, and less of a jest.

So, uh, yeah, why was this thread closed?

Shintek
December 20th, 2010, 02:42 AM
Maybe some people found it offensive

dondiego2
December 20th, 2010, 02:46 AM
It was merged with a similar thread.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1648562

Shintek
December 20th, 2010, 02:47 AM
/thread

CharlesA
December 20th, 2010, 02:49 AM
Thread moved to Resolution Center.

Frak
December 20th, 2010, 02:49 AM
It was merged with a similar thread.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1648562
Read before you post nonsense like this.

KiwiNZ
December 20th, 2010, 03:18 AM
As there had been a similar thread and an explanation posted the thread was deemed superfluous and end of life.

Frak
December 20th, 2010, 03:20 AM
As there had been a similar thread and an explanation posted the thread was deemed superfluous and end of life.
If you had read the post to my blog, what I put there was a bookmarklet that allowed users to censor the word "com", replacing it with "***", just as the mistake had done. The thread was not inquiring on the issue nor was its purpose to seek elaboration. It was created in jest for users to try and have fun with.

KiwiNZ
December 20th, 2010, 09:31 AM
As I have been in Hospital for over a week and will be in Hospital for some time yet I think it would be best if one of the other Forum Council Members continue this.

bapoumba
December 20th, 2010, 12:27 PM
Cafe games would have been a better idea to create the thread, Frak, Would have been clear you were just having happy fun with other UF members.

Even if we were bots, such glitches could have happened in the matrix. Now we have moved on, have you ?

Frak
December 20th, 2010, 06:53 PM
Cafe games would have been a better idea to create the thread, Frak, Would have been clear you were just having happy fun with other UF members.

Even if we were bots, such glitches could have happened in the matrix. Now we have moved on, have you ?
Move on from what?

bodhi.zazen
December 20th, 2010, 08:19 PM
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1649104

It doesn't break the CoC (at least I don't think it does), and was created only in safe fun.

Although I did not close the thread, it seems you answered your own question.
It seems the mods/admins read it as a complaint, and less of a jest.

So, uh, yeah, why was this thread closed?

We have had several discussions with you over the years and so I am fairly certain your posting style is not in any way accidental.

When you post with an abrasive style, and considering your history, I expect thread closures.

With that in mind, you have not made a reasonable argument for why the thread should be opened. The thread was not jailed so the content is visible on these forums, of what benefit to the community is there to open the thread?

Perhaps if you were less abrasive in your posting style or if you were to make a reasonable request you would have better luck.

Frak
December 20th, 2010, 08:44 PM
Although I did not close the thread, it seems you answered your own question.

We have had several discussions with you over the years and so I am fairly certain your posting style is not in any way accidental.

When you post with an abrasive style, and considering your history, I expect thread closures.

With that in mind, you have not made a reasonable argument for why the thread should be opened. The thread was not jailed so the content is visible on these forums, of what benefit to the community is there to open the thread?

Perhaps if you were less abrasive in your posting style or if you were to make a reasonable request you would have better luck.
What? There was nothing there that was the slightest bit abrasive. Nowhere did I flame anybody, nowhere did I condemn anybody, and nowhere did I mock anybody. All I did was point to a post where I created a script that censors the part "com".

Also, when I posted the appeal, nowhere did I say "You stupid UF staff, why did you close my holy thread of amazingness!", I just said "I don't think it broke the CoC, and I would like to know why it was closed."

I would truly like to know which part was abrasive, other than that, it feels like the staff is discriminating against me (again).

KiwiNZ
December 20th, 2010, 09:15 PM
Frak , I really don't have the energy for this, and I am way too ill. But there was not discrimination, as I said in one of my earlier posts , the matter had been resolved, and your posts was superfluous and end of life.

Thats all.

Frak
December 20th, 2010, 09:32 PM
Frak , I really don't have the energy for this, and I am way too ill. But there was not discrimination, as I said in one of my earlier posts , the matter had been resolved, and your posts was superfluous and end of life.

Thats all.
Well, alright, I guess I'm sorry for the inconvenience I've placed against the Ubuntu Forums Administration.

bodhi.zazen
December 20th, 2010, 11:02 PM
I also am not going to hash through all your history here, that is not the point of the Resolution center.

I see no justification to re-open the thread and without such a request I see no reason to open the thread.

Frak
December 20th, 2010, 11:18 PM
I also am not going to hash through all your history here, that is not the point of the Resolution center.

I see no justification to re-open the thread and without such a request I see no reason to open the thread.
You pretty much already said that, a couple of times. Also, shouldn't the matter of reopening a thread be based the content of the thread and not the person's history? I mean, we don't pass laws based on those that propose the bill, we pass them based on the content.

Just some food for thought.

bodhi.zazen
December 20th, 2010, 11:56 PM
You pretty much already said that, a couple of times. Also, shouldn't the matter of reopening a thread be based the content of the thread and not the person's history? I mean, we don't pass laws based on those that propose the bill, we pass them based on the content.

Just some food for thought.

We re-open threads based on requests to do so and ask for justification.

Without such a justification on your part I consider the matter closed.

Frak
December 22nd, 2010, 08:05 AM
We re-open threads based on requests to do so and ask for justification.

Without such a justification on your part I consider the matter closed.
Because it was a fun little script? I mean, ok, so it doesn't belong in the Cafe, move it to games maybe? I'm being polite here, and I'm just trying to overcome your overly-resistant attitude towards me.

KiwiNZ
December 22nd, 2010, 08:48 AM
In the spirit of compromise and resolution I have reopened the thread and moved it to Cafe Games.

I trust this bring this all to an amicable close that all can accept.