Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pinkgothic
moderators tend to be in place to 'feel' a situation out a bit. [...] they're there to add subjectivity
|
Well, I strongly disagree. It's not necessery to add subjectivity to a thread, cause it's already there. In each and every post.
Quote:
|
I think the worst thing someone can do is publically accuse a moderator of having closed a thread in jest or without reason. That's unfair, in my eyes.
|
I don't think anybody has done that.
I have pointed out (and not accused) to the moderator, that he seemingly misunderstood something. What's unfair about that?
And on a more general note: If it shouldn't be possible to factually criticise moderators, we were in trouble. It's not like moderaters are uber-humans, who'd never make mistakes. So it's only for everyone's best, if they get a wide spectrum of feedback.
(Bashing or insulting moderators is a different thing. But that applies to anyone, not just moderators.)
Quote:
|
And I have to completely agree with Trep that this should have been taken to PM
|
Why?
Quote:
|
As for locking or not locking threads in general - that's mostly what my first paragraph was aiming to explain somewhat. As I see it, every moderator here has good intentions. If you find a thread is locked without reason, try taking it up with the moderator (in PM). Public accusations... well, frankly put, they tend to be ignored. For good reasons.
|
For what reasons?
You know, the problem is: Closure of a thread is a public thing. A lot of people are witnessing it. Also the thread contents itself are witnessed by a lot of people. So, it should either be possible to explain the closure publically, or not be done at all in the first place. (Otherwise it can sometimes even appear as if something has been tried to hide.)
Usually good moderators will explain the closure in a final post within the thread in question anyway (as has been attempted by tabs in the given case).
So, I really don't understand some people's fear of publicity.
Admittedly, it's never nice to be criticised in public, I can understand this. But that seems to be more down to a question of vanity, and I don't think vanity is a good property for a moderator (in that role as such). (Genrally there's not much to say against vanity.
)
