PDA

View Full Version : Equal Treatment, Please



stalker145
December 20th, 2007, 02:07 AM
Re:Gun Control: Redirect from thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=637255)


Originally written by KiwiNZ
Use the search applet ,you will see that this subject has been discussed here at length. (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=3980819&postcount=51)

Let's think about those words for a moment.

"You will see that this (http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php?searchid=33299937) subject (http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php?searchid=33300042) has (http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php?searchid=33299992) been (http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php?searchid=33300012) discussed (http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php?searchid=33300123) here (http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php?searchid=33300140) at (http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php?searchid=33300430) length (http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php?searchid=33300153)".

Let's look at the topics that I used the search applet for:
Compiz - 133 hits
Network - 173 hits
Religion - 19 hits
Apache - 143 hits
Laptop - 175 hits
Desktop - 170 hits
United States - 112 hits (113 if you use quotes)
WindowsIt appears that there are quite a few topics that need to be closed due to the fact that they have been discussed more than some would like.

Wow, gun control (http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php?searchid=33301192) gets 16 hits and "gun control" (http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php?searchid=33301226) (notice the quotes) only gets 9 hits. It doesn't appear that this topic has been discussed as much as believed.

Regardless of the opinion of some, if a topic is being discussed in a new thread, why should it not continue to be discussed? In this case there was no warning as laid out in Section III of the Code of Conduct
Thread Closing:
If a thread has run it's course and posts have begun repeating themes a thread may be closed - if possible, announce that the thread has run it's course before closing so that people may add closing statements - don't forget to thank all users involved in the discussion. If a thread has become a situation where people are simply too personally involved in the issue a thread may be closed and / or jailed. If a thread is a duplicate of another thread, it may be closed (please provide a link to another open thread on the same topic.) It is always a good idea to post an explanation in a thread that is closed.
Maybe I'm just not privy to all the threads that are repeatedly discussed that get closed. Maybe I just notice this more because it's more edifying than Burrito (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=589566), The 10000 Game (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=565461), or The BUMP Thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=520091) and I pay more attention to things that are entertaining or make me think.

Is it possible to get some equality here on thread closings? Can we, please, have moderation that follows the rules as we are required to? Can't we all just get along?

I'm sure that I'll be blasted for bringing up moderator mistakes. It wouldn't be the first time.

KiwiNZ
December 20th, 2007, 03:27 AM
From your post

"If a thread has run it's course and posts have begun repeating themes a thread may be closed - if possible, announce that the thread has run it's course before closing......"

As the gun control issue has been discussed at length in many threads the topic goes around and around and niether side will ever concede.
The whole thing becomes repetative and degenerates into a flame war.
The decision to close was based on the repetative nature of the thread and its inevitable conclusion.

To do this is well with in the scope of the Forum staff.

stalker145
December 20th, 2007, 03:41 AM
From your post

"If a thread has run it's course and posts have begun repeating themes a thread may be closed - if possible, announce that the thread has run it's course before closing......"

As the gun control issue has been discussed at length in many threads the topic goes around and around and niether side will ever concede.
The whole thing becomes repetative and degenerates into a flame war.
The decision to close was based on the repetative nature of the thread and its inevitable conclusion.

To do this is well with in the scope of the Forum staff.


KiwiNZ, I do appreciate your response and the work that you do on these forums. I would, however, appreciate a disinterested moderator to cover this complaint.

Thanks.

KiwiNZ
December 20th, 2007, 03:50 AM
Moderators do not attend to matters in the Resolution Centre. This is for Admins to deal with.

If you wish this issue looked at you need to respond approriately.

Therefore can you please advise why you believe that it is outside the scope of staff to close a thread and in particular this one .

Also please advise why you believe the decision to close the thread should be varied.

I meant to add originally in this post . I am happy to change my decision if given good reason to do so

stalker145
December 20th, 2007, 05:04 AM
Moderators do not attend to matters in the Resolution Centre. This is for Admins to deal with.
Sorry for misuse of terms. In my mistaken mind moderator=administrator=moderator.

If you wish this issue looked at you need to respond approriately.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by this, but I do hope that it's not in the spirit that I originally took it as. But, to continue...

As mentioned in my original post, there is a good deal of bias, in my opinion, on the administrative/moderating staff. Take a look at the links that I provided and you will see hundreds of recurring discussions - things that have been talked about to no end and will continue to be talked about. If the staff wishes to curb this dead horse of gun control that is continually beaten, then they should do the same with all other topics.

I asked for a different administrator because, once again, my complaint was about something that was done by you. I do not feel that it is appropriate for the one being complained about to be the one answering the complaint.

On that note, I did a 30-second experiment earlier. I false-started a thread (went into the back yard, clicked to create a new post, and typed gun control as the title). What I found was interesting. There were four suggestions given for other threads. Of those four threads, two were closed by you. I feel that you may be too close to the topic to be unbiased (judging by your comments on the closing of the threads - example 1 (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=3980819&postcount=51) and example 2 (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=2512606&postcount=6)).

Therefore can you please advise why you believe that it is outside the scope of staff to close a thread and in particular this one .
I do not feel that it is, as you put it, outside your scope to close the thread. My problem was with, in my interpretation, the violation of Section III of the CoC, specifically the bolded parts.
Thread Closing:
If a thread has run it's course and posts have begun repeating themes a thread may be closed - if possible, announce that the thread has run it's course before closing so that people may add closing statements - don't forget to thank all users involved in the discussion. If a thread has become a situation where people are simply too personally involved in the issue a thread may be closed and / or jailed. If a thread is a duplicate of another thread, it may be closed (please provide a link to another open thread on the same topic.) It is always a good idea to post an explanation in a thread that is closed.

Also please advise why you believe the decision to close the thread should be varied.
Quite the contrary. I believe the decision to close should be standard. That is why I gave the reference links in my original post. It is the staff that have taken it upon themselves to have a multi-tiered standard on closure. It is impossible for us at the user level to know what will cause a thread to be closed. As an example, the thread that brought me here seemed to be very tame even compared to the "Talking trash about each others avatars (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=559299)" thread. There were users in the gun control discussion that had not previously expressed an opinion in the other gun control threads (and Lord knows, I've been in them all... LOL) which leads to the assumption that something new might come from a continued discussion. I do not see why it was closed and can not know because no reason was given.

I meant to add originally in this post . I am happy to change my decision if given good reason to do so
My opinion again here: A good reason to reverse the closing, or even allow a future thread to remain open, would be in the interest of fairness. Treat all threads the same regardless of your opinion on the topic.

KiwiNZ
December 20th, 2007, 08:38 AM
I am neutral on the topic.

But OK for fairness I will give the thread a second chance , but if it goes the way of previous it will be closed