Should Members be able to lock threads?

[Spotted Horses]

I see that @Todd has started a Beethoven review thread where he locks the thread after each post, only unlocking briefly to make a new entry. This denies members the ability to make any comment of conduct any peripheral discussion of the topic.

Speaking only for myself, I consider this an unacceptable use of the board. I don't know if there is an explicit rule forbidding this, but I find it violates the spirit of the board. Whatever we post here implicitly becomes the property of the community and open to discussion. I don't know if the forum software allows it, but I think ordinary members should not have to ability to lock a thread, and that this privilege should be reserved to moderators.

[AnotherSpin]

As long as it doesn't endanger the life or mental health of other forum members, Todd can be allowed to do whatever he wants with his thread. I don't care at all, I already know the top three.

[Karl Henning]

I see that @Todd has started a Beethoven review thread where he locks the thread after each post, only unlocking briefly to make a new entry. This denies members the ability to make any comment of conduct any peripheral discussion of the topic.

Speaking only for myself, I consider this an unacceptable use of the board. I don't know if there is an explicit rule forbidding this, but I find it violates the spirit of the board. Whatever we post here implicitly becomes the property of the community and open to discussion. I don't know if the forum software allows it, but I think ordinary members should not have to ability to lock a thread, and that this privilege should be reserved to moderators.

Maybe he just needs to start a blog, if that's how he's treating the thread.

[Maestro267]

Easy solution. Make a Blogs subforum for threads like that. Then you can just avoid it if it bothers you that much. (My answer to the question: Yes. Yes we should.)

[(poco) Sforzando]

If Todd doesn't want anyone else to crash his party, fine by me. Others can start their own threads in response to the locked one.

[Spotted Horses]

Maybe he just needs to start a blog, if that's how he's treating the thread.

I take no issue with the format or content of the OP's posting to the thread, but it should be open. I understand that the new closed version was motivated by the fact that the original degenerated into name-calling, but I don't think this is the right way to address that. If our comments and discussions are not welcome the thread should not be here, speaking for myself.

[Karl Henning]

I take no issue with the format or content of the OP's posting to the thread, but it should be open. I understand that the new closed version was motivated by the fact that the original degenerated into name-calling, but I don't think this is the right way to address that. If our comments and discussions are not welcome the thread should not be here, speaking for myself.

I see your point and agree. I guess my point was that if he wants both to post and to regulate responses, creating a blog might suit him better. 

[Spotted Horses]

I see your point and agree. I guess my point was that if he wants both to post and to regulate responses, creating a blog might suit him better.

I don't speak for Todd, obviously, but I don't take for granted that he wants to strictly suppress responses and create an effective blog. Nasty ad hominem responses were the issue, but this is not the way to address it, in my view.

[Maestro267]

Honestly it's gravely concerning that posts are even having to be deleted for people crossing the line. What's happened to our formerly-civilised forum? That's the bigger question here.

[Brian]

Honestly it's gravely concerning that posts are even having to be deleted for people crossing the line. What's happened to our formerly-civilised forum? That's the bigger question here.

Posts have been quietly deleted since the forum began. I don't have any way to judge whether they're being deleted more now, or less, or about the same. I remember some of the times that my posts have been deleted by the previous mods. A few years ago, the problems were concentrated in "What Are You Listening To," which is so busy and frequently-posted that people used to shoot insults at each other thinking nobody else would notice. Many years ago (10+ years), there were even 1-2 trolls so malicious that their whole accounts got zapped. Other trolls were simply banned. As far as I know, we have not banned anybody in years.

The mods are talking to a lot of people by PM right now. We're expecting the standoff will be resolved soon and the nasty personal attacks that started it will not be repeated.

Whether or not there is a trend, like Maestro says, I always wonder why people get so enraged on here. I'm also annoyed when the personal attacks that we all know we shouldn't make eventually reappear anyway. The moderators take a very laissez-faire attitude toward temporary/permanent bans, mutes, etc., and we really do not want to be forced to reconsider that. Music is fun, discussing it is fun, and seeing actual rancor in the music threads always surprises me. I'm here because it's fun and nice to talk about music, I hope everyone else remembers that they are here for the same reason.

[DavidW]

Honestly it's gravely concerning that posts are even having to be deleted for people crossing the line. What's happened to our formerly-civilised forum? That's the bigger question here.

I would say it is still civilized. We can go weeks at a time without anything happening. People occasionally lose their temper. That is just human nature.

[(poco) Sforzando]

I would say it is still civilized. We can go weeks at a time without anything happening. People occasionally lose their temper. That is just human nature.

Damned right. Anybody who takes that stupid introduction repeat in the Pathetique ought to be shot.

[San Antone]

I don't speak for Todd, obviously, but I don't take for granted that he wants to strictly suppress responses and create an effective blog. Nasty ad hominem responses were the issue, but this is not the way to address it, in my view.

I am sympathetic to Todd's reaction. 

I watched as his (what I assumed was obvious) light-hearted, tongue-in-cheek, send up of classical music rankings and reviewers who take themselves too seriously, was misunderstood by several members (all non-American and whom may have not "gotten" the humor) and the entire mood of the thread was destroyed, distracted, culminating with one member actually becoming verbally abusive.

While it is a loss to the forum for Todd's thread remain locked and not include comments from others, I understand his response completely.

I only hope that the discussion occurring via PM clears the air enough so that Todd will once again keep his thread unlocked.

[(poco) Sforzando]

I am sympathetic to Todd's reaction. 

I watched as his (what I assumed was obvious) light-hearted, tongue-in-cheek, send up of classical music rankings and reviewers who take themselves too seriously, was misunderstood by several members (all non-American and whom may have not "gotten" the humor) and the entire mood of the thread was destroyed, distracted, culminating with one member actually becoming verbally abusive.

While it is a loss to the forum for Todd's thread remain locked and not include comments from others, I understand his response completely.

I only hope that the discussion occurring via PM clears the air enough so that Todd will once again keep his thread unlocked.

Good points, San Antone.

[ShineyMcShineShine]

Whatever we post here implicitly becomes the property of the community and open to discussion.

This is the key point in my opinion. If you don't want to engage in discussion, don't post in a public forum. If you don't want to have your feelings hurt, don't post in a public forum. I avoid using public forums if they are overly moderated and restrictive of free speech, not because they might expose me to nasty personal attacks. Nothing is more aggravating than spending time writing a thoughtful post or six only to have some power-mad mod delete it. If two users have bad blood, I assume this forum has an option allowing them to block each other without requiring a mod to delete posts and deprive everyone else of their contributions.

[Brian]

I am sympathetic to Todd's reaction. 

I watched as his (what I assumed was obvious) light-hearted, tongue-in-cheek, send up of classical music rankings and reviewers who take themselves too seriously, was misunderstood by several members (all non-American and whom may have not "gotten" the humor) and the entire mood of the thread was destroyed, distracted, culminating with one member actually becoming verbally abusive.

While it is a loss to the forum for Todd's thread remain locked and not include comments from others, I understand his response completely.

I only hope that the discussion occurring via PM clears the air enough so that Todd will once again keep his thread unlocked.

Speaking personally only, this is my feeling as well.

I assume this forum has an option allowing them to block each other without requiring a mod to delete posts and deprive everyone else of their contributions.

Yes, there is a block function. It has two fallibilities. Users can still see quotes from posts they have blocked; and users may lack the willpower to keep their enemies blocked.

[SimonNZ]

Is this "free speech absolutist" Todd we're talking about?

[Todd]

Others can start their own threads in response to the locked one.

This simple point has obviously eluded people.  Why that might be is anyone's guess.

[SimonNZ]

This simple point has obviously eluded people.  Why that might be is anyone's guess.

What do you think the word "forum" means? How do you think "forums" work?

Go start a blog.


edit: how is this not seen as a form of trolling on a chat site?

[Brian]

edit: how is this not seen as a form of trolling on a chat site?

Speaking only for myself again here, but the context of being a defense against personal attacks alters the picture I think. This is certainly not the first time a user has locked their own thread in self-defense (although it is the first time someone has pre-emptively started a new locked thread). I'm hoping that, like when the mods lock something temporarily to let the temperature cool down, it's only for a moment.