They are in charge as the thread starter....is their thread.Not sure how else I can say it. They are responsible to a degree, but then again so are the other people who are derailing the thread.
So if you made a thread and then it went awry and you came to the mods and we refused to lock it you would be ok with that?Even if it was upsetting you and you just wanted it to stop for a while so it could be reasssessed? I think there would be another thread on this board complaining about the mods not doing what you requested and that its your right to have your thread locked.
There are times to stay put, and what you want will come to you.
But there are times to go out into the world and find such a thing for yourself.
I aint no abacus but you can count on me.
Ah. See, I would say Spam was something that here detracted people who wanted help from getting it.
RYL has become very un-supportive recently, and I do feel that the high level of spam has contributed to that.
I'd just like to point out that what you call spam may actually be support for someone else. For myself, and I think I'm not alone, talking nonsense can get me through rough times as much as talking about the actual issue. I do however agree that the Uni Student Thread was not the place for this to be happening, and I think we may have resolved that matter...
"And sometimes when our fights begin,
I think I'll let the Dragons win...
And then I think perhaps I won't,
Because they're Dragons, and I don't."
If a shop wants to close (even if they have been serving lots of people) they have the right to, regardless of who was using the service. The same applies here.
If you want to spam, spam on the spam threads. There is a giant one in general chat, which is for... hold it.... general chat. I don't care if you talk absolutely bollocks about flying ponies and god knows what else on that thread! It can be a weird and wonderful place for everyone.
Support threads, on the other hand, should stay supportive. A few bits of "how're you getting on at x/y/z" is fine, everyone does that. But repeatedly carrying on when it is clearly there for support is a bit not good.
in a way isn't the thread being sort of the responsibility of the OP a little unfair to the OP? Could they not start to feel overly responsible for the goings on on the thread and the members of it? As an example whenever the safe room is commented upon by anyone Tracie gets very upset about is as she feels like the posters and the thread is getting attacked and sometimes it seems like she feels she is responsible for EVERYONE in the thread which has got to be a lot of pressure...
also what happens if the OP leaves or makes a new account but does not delete their posts/threads before hand?
sorry if asking obvious questions, just things that been wondering while reading throuhg the thread
The only thing I am struggling to understand with this whole thing, is that when I was posting regularly in the thread last year and before, spam was accepted as part of the Uni thread. Even the first post of the entire thread actively encouraged spam. It has since been edited now obviously. So I think regular posters could be forgiven for feeling like having general conversations between each other was quite normal for the thread, and therefore a post just to state that maybe the spam was getting too much would have been enough for them to have a think about it, rather than the thread just suddenly closing like that.
I also don't think it's very fair for people to question how hurt and upset some people have got because of this whole thing. The thread was important to some people and to have it suddenly close in the way that it did, has hurt them and I don't see how passing judgement on that fact helps anybody.
I think that a set definition of "spam" maybe of use... I mean are we talking about people having conversations, or people posting nonsense, or people posting over and over on the same thread without adding to the conversation, or things going off topic, or what? I may be missing something but I am getting a little confsused
If you want to spam, spam on the spam threads. There is a giant one in general chat, which is for... hold it.... general chat. I don't care if you talk absolutely bollocks about flying ponies and god knows what else on that thread! It can be a weird and wonderful place for everyone.
That's right, but from what I've read on here, that one thread dedicated for general chat is still too much as it's apparently clogging up LV.
Because now I don't particularly want to post in a thread I'm just beginning to feel comfortable with, when the contents is being scrutinised and judged.
- Regardless of etiquette or whatever, once a person has created a thread, they absolutely have the right to delete it without consulting anyone else. This is why all members have the ability to do this themselves.
- Dependant on the reason for them choosing to delete their thread, another can absolutely be created in its place. even with the same intro post or whatever, just without that users name attached to it.
- Just because a person creates a thread, it is then not their responsibility to moderate it.
There are times to stay put, and what you want will come to you.
But there are times to go out into the world and find such a thing for yourself.
I aint no abacus but you can count on me.
We are just going in circles now. I agree with Charlie though. A member should not feel they have to explain their actions if they feel they need/want to delete something they put on the Internet - it could be for personal/confidential reasons.
DILLIGAF
"it’s when you’re acting selflessly, that you are at your bravest"
- Four.
♥
Then from now on threads that are rooms or groups or provided for a bunch of people (uni students, Christians, people with BPD) should be PMd to and made by the staff.
It is a good idea, but staff are members too. What happens if they want to step down from moderating duties/leave etc. Surely we'll still be in the same boat?
DILLIGAF
"it’s when you’re acting selflessly, that you are at your bravest"
- Four.
♥
Why? The staff didn't make them. There seems to be some confusion over moderator action and member action. In this case, the mods simply acted out a request from a member, and yet it is the mods who seem to be getting the most flack.
I think this could have been a really productive thread touching on the problems of general spamming on RYL and the balance that is needed when it comes to support, but it is almost nine pages of the same line of argument going around and around.
The mods don't come up with the "group" threads though. They are started by members who hope to fill a niche. Mod-started group threads sound far too contrived.
If a thread is made for a group of people not a single person it should be made by an impartial account.
This is a good idea. it may also encourage members to post in threads that interest them where as before the starter of the thread might put people off posting.
Im just wondering about the logistics of it.
eg: if a member creates a thread not thinking it fits in and it gets flagged for the mods, but one of us isnt on for 24 hours or whatever.. do we then delete 24 hours worth of posts to recreate the thread?
Also, whos job would it be to decide if a thread idea will work? or would we just make every thread that was requested?
