Open Thread on Rules/Restrictions

[wdleehi]

If a thread with a real topics gets locked because of posters getting off topics and just bickering, posters are free to start a new post on the original topic of the thread.


If a topic is locked because of the the actual topic, don't restart the the thread.



If you are not sure why a topic is locked, feel free to PM the staff member that locked it.  Ask, we will surely give you a more detailed explanation. 

[nickagneta]

I started one of the locked threads here hoping to get some discussion as to how opinions on the trades had changed over time and knew there was a very good chance it may be locked if the other poster decided to participate. But I fully expected what occured. No big deal. You move on. Unfortunately I thought that was a pretty decent piece of writing and now its gone. Oh well.

[tb727]

Hey everyone, long time listener, rare poster.  I'm writing because it seems to me that the locking of threads is out of hand.  I realize that I'm only a user of this site, and that I'm beholden to the terms of use as designed by the site administrators.  That said, it's getting to the point where I'd rather read Celtic forums on other sites purely so that I don't have to worry about the 1st amendment being suppressed.  Often times threads seem to get locked for very subjective reasons.

I want to be careful with this post, as I do really enjoy CelticBlog.  It's an excellent site, with (mostly) respectful and erudite fans.  And, as stated, I realize the terms of use are entirely up to the site administrators. 

That disclaimer aside, frankly, I'm stunned given the liberal nature of the internet that more people aren't up in arms over this issue.  Am I the only one that feels this site is much too militant?

I agree with you too.  I've been a bit lazy looking for other Celtic forums to join so perhaps I should take that route.  But some things do seem a bit extreme here.  The Kevin Garnett post the other day about him "tearing his ACL", I thought was funny.  (I must admit I am a bit nervous writing that I thought it was funny because I feel I now may be banned.)  But the thread was locked and the poster banned for 2 weeks.

Obviously things can be misconstrued through writing (mood and tone specifically).  But personally I feel some people should lighten up.  Just my thoughts for what it's worth.

[Edgar]

I started one of the locked threads here hoping to get some discussion as to how opinions on the trades had changed over time and knew there was a very good chance it may be locked if the other poster decided to participate. But I fully expected what occured. No big deal. You move on. Unfortunately I thought that was a pretty decent piece of writing and now its gone. Oh well.

Actually it was , and ur post was just fine
but the thread goes the wrong way.
Thanks for understanding.

[wdleehi]

I started one of the locked threads here hoping to get some discussion as to how opinions on the trades had changed over time and knew there was a very good chance it may be locked if the other poster decided to participate. But I fully expected what occured. No big deal. You move on. Unfortunately I thought that was a pretty decent piece of writing and now its gone. Oh well.

Actually it was , and ur post was just fine
but the thread goes the wrong way.
Thanks for understanding.

Though the title needs a little more thought next time. 

[Edgar]

I started one of the locked threads here hoping to get some discussion as to how opinions on the trades had changed over time and knew there was a very good chance it may be locked if the other poster decided to participate. But I fully expected what occured. No big deal. You move on. Unfortunately I thought that was a pretty decent piece of writing and now its gone. Oh well.

Actually it was , and ur post was just fine
but the thread goes the wrong way.
Thanks for understanding.

Though the title needs a little more thought next time. 

yes indeed... Nobody likes to be called like that. well...yeah nobody

[Roy Hobbs]

Hey everyone, long time listener, rare poster.  I'm writing because it seems to me that the locking of threads is out of hand.  I realize that I'm only a user of this site, and that I'm beholden to the terms of use as designed by the site administrators.  That said, it's getting to the point where I'd rather read Celtic forums on other sites purely so that I don't have to worry about the 1st amendment being suppressed.  Often times threads seem to get locked for very subjective reasons.

I want to be careful with this post, as I do really enjoy CelticBlog.  It's an excellent site, with (mostly) respectful and erudite fans.  And, as stated, I realize the terms of use are entirely up to the site administrators. 

That disclaimer aside, frankly, I'm stunned given the liberal nature of the internet that more people aren't up in arms over this issue.  Am I the only one that feels this site is much too militant?

I agree with you too.  I've been a bit lazy looking for other Celtic forums to join so perhaps I should take that route.  But some things do seem a bit extreme here.  The Kevin Garnett post the other day about him "tearing his ACL", I thought was funny.  (I must admit I am a bit nervous writing that I thought it was funny because I feel I now may be banned.)  But the thread was locked and the poster banned for 2 weeks.

Obviously things can be misconstrued through writing (mood and tone specifically).  But personally I feel some people should lighten up.  Just my thoughts for what it's worth.

There are clear rules against starting misleading thread titles.  There are clear rules against trolling and baiting other posters.  That type of "joke" isn't permitted, and it upset a lot of posters.  That particular user also has a history of inappropriate content.  The locking of the thread and the suspension were absolutely appropriate, and  I would do the same thing again.

[nickagneta]

I started one of the locked threads here hoping to get some discussion as to how opinions on the trades had changed over time and knew there was a very good chance it may be locked if the other poster decided to participate. But I fully expected what occured. No big deal. You move on. Unfortunately I thought that was a pretty decent piece of writing and now its gone. Oh well.

Actually it was , and ur post was just fine
but the thread goes the wrong way.
Thanks for understanding.

Though the title needs a little more thought next time. 

Agreed, I always name the thread first and then type the post. I should go back and revisit the title more often.

[priceisright]

I appreciate the insights, and I do appreciate the hard work put in by the administrators.  Further, and to be clear, my "1st amendment" and "militant" comments were just hyperbole to spark conversation.  As stated, I fully understand that the administrators of the site can run it however they wish.

That said, locking threads because posters are "off topics and just bickering" seems entirely subjective.  What are the rules governing "off topic"?  What constitutes "bickering"?

Also, I completely agree tb727 about the acl tear post.  Perhaps the rules for baiting are clear, but was it really necessary to ban someone 2 weeks for simply having a dark sense of humor?  I suppose if they had a history, then I guess...

I would probably be happier with the site if it could be entirely user moderated (ala Digg, CL, /., etc), but alas, those systems are not easy to implement...

[kamakawiwaole]

ok with some threads they get locked too quickly.  people say "oh well its going nowhere"  well if it gets locked then how can it get back on course.  i visit this site a lot but not as much as many of the posters here, and often times i want to comment on a thread (about the topic)  even if the last posters have taken it off the topic, but i dont get a chance because its locked.

so maybe you could use a little more discretion before locking threads.

thanks

cheers

kamakaw

[Edgar]

As W says before kamakawiwaole if u think the topc is interesting u can always start a thread again, and maybe ask for the other posters to keep on topic.
Beleive me, Mods are not Kindergarden teachers and we cant be reasoning with every single poster

Although sometimes its fun

[Roy Hobbs]

I appreciate the insights, and I do appreciate the hard work put in by the administrators.  Further, and to be clear, my "1st amendment" and "militant" comments were just hyperbole to spark conversation.  As stated, I fully understand that the administrators of the site can run it however they wish.

That said, locking threads because posters are "off topics and just bickering" seems entirely subjective.  What are the rules governing "off topic"?  What constitutes "bickering"?

Also, I completely agree tb727 about the acl tear post.  Perhaps the rules for baiting are clear, but was it really necessary to ban someone 2 weeks for simply having a dark sense of humor?  I suppose if they had a history, then I guess...

I would probably be happier with the site if it could be entirely user moderated (ala Digg, CL, /., etc), but alas, those systems are not easy to implement...

I'll try to say this as respectfully as possible, but the rules and the application thereof aren't going to be changed.  We'll listen to concerns, but the whole "this place is oppressive, I prefer other blogs" vibe that some users have is pointless.  If there are other blogs people prefer, they can post there, where content pushes the envelope a little more.  We link to just about every Celtics blog and site on the internet in our "bookmarks" folder, so for those who feel too oppressed, they're welcome to try something new.

Again, the ACL post was misleading, and constituted baiting.  Also, I'm pretty sure there are, in fact, clear rules about how users are to conduct themselves here.  Again, I fully admit that some sites allow more than we do here, but I'm personally okay with that.

As for kamakawiwaole's suggestion about giving threads a chance to sort themselves out, I know that generally moderators ask posters to get back on track before locking a thread.  However, some posts are doomed from the start.  It's probably something to be paid attention to, but certain threads (such as the ACL one) can't be resurrected under any circumstances.

[tb727]

I appreciate the insights, and I do appreciate the hard work put in by the administrators.  Further, and to be clear, my "1st amendment" and "militant" comments were just hyperbole to spark conversation.  As stated, I fully understand that the administrators of the site can run it however they wish.

That said, locking threads because posters are "off topics and just bickering" seems entirely subjective.  What are the rules governing "off topic"?  What constitutes "bickering"?

Also, I completely agree tb727 about the acl tear post.  Perhaps the rules for baiting are clear, but was it really necessary to ban someone 2 weeks for simply having a dark sense of humor?  I suppose if they had a history, then I guess...

I would probably be happier with the site if it could be entirely user moderated (ala Digg, CL, /., etc), but alas, those systems are not easy to implement...

I'll try to say this as respectfully as possible, but the rules and the application thereof aren't going to be changed.  We'll listen to concerns, but the whole "this place is oppressive, I prefer other blogs" vibe that some users have is pointless.  If there are other blogs people prefer, they can post there, where content pushes the envelope a little more.  We link to just about every Celtics blog and site on the internet in our "bookmarks" folder, so for those who feel too oppressed, they're welcome to try something new.

Again, the ACL post was misleading, and constituted baiting.  Also, I'm pretty sure there are, in fact, clear rules about how users are to conduct themselves here.  Again, I fully admit that some sites allow more than we do here, but I'm personally okay with that.

As for kamakawiwaole's suggestion about giving threads a chance to sort themselves out, I know that generally moderators ask posters to get back on track before locking a thread.  However, some posts are doomed from the start.  It's probably something to be paid attention to, but certain threads (such as the ACL one) can't be resurrected under any circumstances.

Thanks for this!  I never even knew it was there.

[Pawtucket Pat]

I pretty much agree that the mods are a little hardcore here, and I'm not crazy about it myself. Problem is, where else are you going to go? Sure, there are plenty of other Celtics blogs out there, but none of them have the following that this one does. There's little to no interaction on the boards, comparitively speaking, on the other blogs I've checked out, and the users don't seem to be as knowledgeable, in general.

So while it's vaguely disconcerting that the mods here are so strict, at the same time, it's kind of the price you have to pay for quality. At the end of the day, it's probably a good thing, or at least not a very bad thing.

[Bob Day]

I would probably be happier with the site if it could be entirely user moderated (ala Digg, CL, /., etc), but alas, those systems are not easy to implement...

Actually setting up and maintaining user moderated systems are not nearly as complicated as setting up a true online community such as CelticsBlog that is not so different from a virtual small town. User moderated systems also have a nasty tendency to grow, burn out and die too and naturally we don't want that.