Should admins be able to close threads they simply disagree with?

[NoTiG]

Here is all that he "constructively" posted in my thread:

"This poll is flawed to the point of useless. The results will be skewed to a point where they are of no value"

instead of stating why my poll was "flawed" or contributing any argument or discussion of meaning he simply... is the technical definition trolled? My thread.

and then this:

"As a staff Administrator of this Forum I shall post in what ever thread I so desire to do so . .
We reserve this right under the forum Code of conduct , as we reserve the right to edit , move and close threads with or with out input.

As the poll attached to this thread is seriously flawed in its make up , as has been pointed out by other members , it will add no value to continue with it.

Please feel free to start another thread with a more carefully constructed poll"

I had addressed any "flaws" that were pointed out by any posters in my thread. If i had not addressed them already i was in the processing of addressing them. Simply because an admin does not like my thread and thinks because one person criticized my logic (even though he misunderstood the meaning of my poll) mean that he should be able to close it?

Request for reopen please.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=504005

[KiwiNZ]

For the record

I neither agree nor disagree with the topic of the Thread in question. I am completely neutral on it.

The Poll was poorly constructed and would have yeilded hopelessly skewed results . This was pointed out by other members.

Editing a poll after votes are added is pointless as it further falsifies the result. There fore the best action was to close the thread and invite a new one , which I did... "Please feel free to start another thread with a more carefully constructed poll ."

I also note your reply to me after my initial response was agreesive and when I indicated clarification you were further agreessive telling me not to participate in the thread. An approach you seemed to have taken with others posting a stance against your Poll construction.

My action was inline with the Forum Code of conduct.

[NoTiG]

For the record

I neither agree nor disagree with the topic of the Thread in question. I am completely neutral on it.

The Poll was poorly constructed and would have yeilded hopelessly skewed results . This was pointed out by other members.

Editing a poll after votes are added is pointless as it further falsifies the result. There fore the best action was to close the thread and invite a new one , which I did... "Please feel free to start another thread with a more carefully constructed poll ."

I also note your reply to me after my initial response was agreesive and when I indicated clarification you were further agreessive telling me not to participate in the thread. An approach you seemed to have taken with others posting a stance against your Poll construction.

My action was inline with the Forum Code of conduct.

So the poll was skewed is fact... not just your opinion?

secondly i was not aggressive to you when you first posted ... trolling my thread. I just invited you to add something to the discussion rather than make bland generalizations. It was you that got defensive for me pointing this out...... So yes i asked you to leave my thread. Is that aggressive? Are even admins allowed to troll threads?

[KiwiNZ]

The resolution centre does not give you the opportunity to be rude and disrepectfull of staff of this forum .

Please refer to the Forum Code of conduct .

[NoTiG]

The resolution centre does not give you the opportunity to be rude and disrepectfull of staff of this forum .

Please refer to the Forum Code of conduct .

You didn't answer me, you are avoiding the question. And btw, where in the rules does it say that admins are allowed to troll on peoples threads? If you came into my thread calling me a Nazi, and i asked you to stop lying would you also call me rude? I have nothing personal against you.. in fact i didn't even mention your name. I just don't think it is right for an admin to close a thread that they simply disagree with.

[KiwiNZ]

From the Code of coduct

"Respect the forum staff. We provide a service in our free time to keep the forums running efficiently. We will occasionally ask for input, but in some cases we will not, please respect our decisions"

"The IP addresses of all posts are recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the web-master, administrators and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any post, topic or thread at any time they see fit following the guidelines outlined below. You agree that the web-master, administrators and moderators of this forum have the right to send a private message with a warning and/or censor any forum user who is in violation of forum policy. "

As I have already stated ... "I neither agree nor disagree with the topic of the Thread in question. I am completely neutral on it.

The Poll was poorly constructed and would have yeilded hopelessly skewed results ."

I have also previously stated , you were invited to start a new poll which is better constructed. And the thread was dealt with in accordance with the above.

With regards to calling a a staff member a troll is clearly in breach of forums . please cease immediately or further action will taken.

[NoTiG]

As I have already stated ... "I neither agree nor disagree with the topic of the Thread in question. I am completely neutral on it.

The Poll was poorly constructed and would have yeilded hopelessly skewed results ."

I have also previously stated , you were invited to start a new poll which is better constructed

You have yet to show how the poll was skewed. As i said in my last post which was unable to be addressed by anyone else since you closed it... the post was not about what our rights are... but that if the majority claims a right for themself, then they cannot call themselves free if they deny that right to an individual since the majority is made of individuals. That is why it is a yes or no answer. The subject of what our rights are can be seen as skewed if I stated them and you happened to disagree... but once again it was not about that. Perhaps if you stopped making threats and abusing your moderator privileges you would actually be able to be involved in the discussion and have an opinion about it... rather than saying you have none which.. i i feel is a blatant lie.

[KiwiNZ]

Your choices were
yes
No, I believe in sacrificing the indivudal for the "greater good"

If you worded it yes or no then it would have been yes or no answer.

Your yes was un qualified but your no was qualified . That skewed any result. And leading a result that you appear to have a predetermined desire for.

There is also degrees of freedom that your selection did not account for .

[KiwiNZ]

Now with regards to your attitude ,
You have stated several times here that I am a troll and I have llied. This is in breach of forum rules . The fact that you are posting in the resolution centre does not allow you to act in this matter.

I am going to apply infraction points for this as I had warned you to stop and chose to continue.

[NoTiG]

Your choices were
yes
No, I believe in sacrificing the indivudal for the "greater good"

If you worded it yes or no then it would have been yes or no answer.

Your yes was un qualified but your no was qualified . That skewed any result. And leading a result that you appear to have a predetermined desire for.

There is also degrees of freedom that your selection did not account for .

The answers were not just yes or no... for one simply because if they were then the poll would truly have been pointless since there would be nothing to debate, Secondly it is not a simple question but a complex issue. If a person actually thinks they are free, but can sacrifice the rights of another individual to better society... then that is essentially denying them a right that they themselves claim. It is a hypocrisy that i meant to discuss