Please remove the option to close own threads.

[Tamoa]

This is an option that we, as mere forum members and not moderators, should not have access to. Unfortunately, I have seen this option being abused more than once lately. If a forum member creates a thread for whatever reason, he or she has to realize there will be posts of an opposing opinion, there might be flaming/trolling, and the topic might even get derailed completely. That is a risk you (unfortunately) run when you make a thread on this or any other forum. But it is the job of the forum moderators to decide when a thread has been derailed badly enough, or the trolling has gone too far. To close your own thread because you don't get the feedback/support you expected from other forum members, is a cowardly thing to do. I can't think of any other FFXI forum that I frequent, that give forum members access to this. Deleting posts, yes - but not closing threads.

My 2 cents.

Let the flaming begin. ;)

[Korpg]

/flames on

Anyway, I don't think it is such a bad idea to have the original creator of the thread have the ability to close threads, but I think that having other people add tags to another's thread is a little far.

Both issues, however, have been abused.

Also, it is not like every moderator can reply or even read every single post here. That is too many posts to read!

[Runespider]

If people do this unwarranted, don't reply to their posts in the future.

If they make a post that people like and close it, just copy'n paste it and make again.

I agree people should have the option to close it though.

[Tamoa]

Why should we be able to close own threads? If there are people trolling or otherwise blatantly breaking forum rules in their replies - well, that's what the report button is for. Other threads have been closed by moderators in the past because they derailed completely and evolved into pooflinging/flame wars.

I just feel it's an easy way out for those that realized they ran out of arguments/lost the debate.

[Korpg]

You know what grinds my gears?

Trolls starting bad threads and closing them right away (http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxi/threads/10561-Smn-are-terrible-DD-and-you-should-feel-bad.)

[Tamoa]

You know what grinds my gears?

Trolls starting bad threads and closing them right away (http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxi/threads/10561-Smn-are-terrible-DD-and-you-should-feel-bad.)

Yep, another good reason why us regular forum users shouldn't have that option at all.

[Valaris]

personally i dont like this feature simply because the OP usually when someone disagrees they will just flame them then close the tread. kinda a !#$%^ move if you ask me.

[Korpg]

You dont have to read threads and you dont have to reply to threads. If it really bothers you so much you can open a topic of your own. It doesnt matter who has the right to close the thread to you if its closed there is nothing more to be added. Less work for moderators if the ops have the right to do it themselves.

If nobody reads any threads, why have threads to begin with?

[Removed by Moderator according to the FINAL FANTASY XI FORUM Guidelines (http://support.na.square-enix.com/rule.php?id=20&la=1).]

[Tamoa]

You dont have to read threads and you dont have to reply to threads. If it really bothers you so much you can open a topic of your own. It doesnt matter who has the right to close the thread to you if its closed there is nothing more to be added. Less work for moderators if the ops have the right to do it themselves.

You also don't have to make threads. But if you do, don't expect everyone that replies to agree with you. If you can't handle people telling you they think you are wrong, then you have no business making threads on a forum like this. Don't make threads that are semi-trolling, just to close them in the middle of the debate after making one last post yourself.

And I use "you" as in "every forum member".

[Valaris]

If nobody reads any threads, why have threads to begin with?

[Removed by Moderator according to the FINAL FANTASY XI FORUM Guidelines (http://support.na.square-enix.com/rule.php?id=20&la=1).]

ooooh yeah katz did do that didnt he on his "i should be able to ninja loot cause the lotting system allows it thread lol" on that note since i didnt get to say anything cause he locked it >.> if you agree to lotting terms then break that agreement the person you ripped off can call a GM and have said item stripped from you so in short SE does support players making lotting rules. now back to the topic at hand no people should not be able to close their own threads as you said its cowardly and it hinders the very purpose of why the forums were made in the first place.

[katz]

I close the thread because it seemed no one wanted to review the lotting system but seemed quite happy with their ls making rule systems. If you need me to re open it I will, I closed it because I thought the lotting system discussion was closed.

[Korpg]

I close the thread because it seemed no one wanted to review the lotting system but seemed quite happy with their ls making rule systems. If you need me to re open it I will, I closed it because I thought the lotting system discussion was closed.

No point, I opened my own thread, with no intention of shutting it down.

[Daremo]

No better to leave it closed, I'd hate to have one of my last posts here consist of me calling someone an idiot.

[Korpg]

No better to leave it closed, I'd hate to have one of my last posts here consist of me calling someone an idiot.

That is what the edit button is for....

[Daniel_Hatcher]

+1 from me

Allowing people to close their own threads is stupid. I know this thread is only half serious but still, OP's should not be allowed to close their own threads on a forum "supposed to be about discussion."



Seems to me some people like flame threads just because they didnt get a chance to answer something they not particularily want to contribute anything useful to other than to say lets flame it. If you have an opinion I wont be opening mine because of this troll thread. IE THIS THREAD DOESNT SERVE ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN TO COMPLAIN ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO COMPLAIN.

You created the thread to discuss then closed it to stop that discussion, If you don't plan on defending your point whilst allowing discussion of it, don't bother opening a thread in the first place.

[Korpg]

Seems to me some people like flame threads just because they didnt get a chance to answer something they not particularily want to contribute anything useful to other than to say lets flame it. If you have an opinion I wont be opening mine because of this troll thread. IE THIS THREAD DOESNT SERVE ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN TO COMPLAIN ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO COMPLAIN.

Actually, reply to the new thread. I'm interested in your opinion of your old thread, but you locked it and now we can't talk about it in your thread. That is why I created mine.

[Tamoa]

Seems to me some people like flame threads just because they didnt get a chance to answer something they not particularily want to contribute anything useful to other than to say lets flame it. If you have an opinion I wont be opening mine because of this troll thread. IE THIS THREAD DOESNT SERVE ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN TO COMPLAIN ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO COMPLAIN.

This isn't a troll thread. Your sense of self-importance is rather large if you think I made this thread only because you closed your own thread earlier.

However, it was a prime example of why I really do think that the option for forum members to close own threads, shouldn't be there. It makes it too easy for every one of us to start a thread, and after a few pages decide "I don't like the replies I'm getting, so I'm going to close this thread", effectively saying f**k you to everyone else here. Also, others might find whatever discussion (even argument) that's going on, to be interesting.

And like I already said, if others are blatantly breaking forum rules, calling you names, pulling the rl card, insulting you etc etc, that's what the report button is there for.

[Winrie]

This isn't a troll thread. Your sense of self-importance is rather large if you think I made this thread only because you closed your own thread earlier.

However, it was a prime example of why I really do think that the option for forum members to close own threads, shouldn't be there. It makes it too easy for every one of us to start a thread, and after a few pages decide "I don't like the replies I'm getting, so I'm going to close this thread", effectively saying f**k you to everyone else here. Also, others might find whatever discussion (even argument) that's going on, to be interesting.

And like I already said, if others are blatantly breaking forum rules, calling you names, pulling the rl card, insulting you etc etc, that's what the report button is there for.

^ This
I want to have your babies tamoa <3

[Korpg]

However, it was a prime example of why I really do think that the option for forum members to close own threads, shouldn't be there. It makes it too easy for every one of us to start a thread, and after a few pages decide "I don't like the replies I'm getting, so I'm going to close this thread", effectively saying f**k you to everyone else here. Also, others might find whatever discussion (even argument) that's going on, to be interesting.


That is why I started up my own thread on the issue that was closed. Continue with the conversation without worry about the original poster trying to close it down, and maybe if the original poster isn't a coward, they could continue with it too.

[Kensagaku]

We get it, you made your own thread, Kporg. I'll even give you a pat on the back for it. :P

Teasing aside, I agree with this thread. Closing threads is just the coward's way out 98.4% of the time. The other 1.6% is some random statistic I made up off the top of my head. Anywho. People only close their threads to duck out of an argument or if they feel that nothing's getting done. In the latter case, just leave it be, and the thread will die out on its own. Most threads aren't even closed; they just lose popularity, fall off the front page, and are forgotten. There is no need to make a close thread option available to the users, other than to create a method for people to run off when they get opposition.

So yeah, down with the close thread option! /picketing

[Korpg]

We get it, you made your own thread, Korpg. I'll even give you a pat on the back for it. :P

Teasing aside, I agree with this thread. Closing threads is just the coward's way out 98.4% of the time. The other 1.6% is some random statistic I made up off the top of my head. Anywho. People only close their threads to duck out of an argument or if they feel that nothing's getting done. In the latter case, just leave it be, and the thread will die out on its own. Most threads aren't even closed; they just lose popularity, fall off the front page, and are forgotten. There is no need to make a close thread option available to the users, other than to create a method for people to run off when they get opposition.

So yeah, down with the close thread option! /picketing

Bolded: Fixed for you.

Actually, I'm just pointing out the reasons why closing one's thread is a pointless move. If you are going to close it to save face, I'll just reopen it to throw mud in your face again. (or something like that)

[Kensagaku]

Whoopsies, my bad on the spelling. That's what I get for typing while dealing with three IMs at once.

But yeah, I agree with you. If someone's going to just close a thread because they don't like the argument, it's easy for anyone to resume the conversation in their own thread. Just more reasons for us to not need the close thread button, I suppose.

[Korpg]

But yeah, I agree with you. If someone's going to just close a thread because they don't like the argument, it's easy for anyone to resume the conversation in their own thread. Just more reasons for us to not need the close thread button, I suppose.

That I will agree with you on. Is the close thread button really needed? Not really.

[Tamoa]

If someone's going to just close a thread because they don't like the argument, it's easy for anyone to resume the conversation in their own thread. Just more reasons for us to not need the close thread button, I suppose.

Yes, this aswell. Having to start a new thread because the first one was closed in the middle of the discussion, also clutters up the forum unnecessarily. A minor thing, yes - but still.

[Raxiaz]

Am I a culprit in closing a thread to "save face?" Maybe so, but I have my reasons for closing my threads. It's my thread, I can do what I want with it. SE says so, you have no power over that. Slander as much as you like!

I close my threads when one or more of the following has occurred:
(1) If the thread was asking for an answer from a Rep, and the Rep responded on the issue.
(2) If the thread has derailed into nothing more than senseless bickering for the sake of epeen.

I know my arguments to my cases. When the opposition fails to acknowledge my side of the argument and address each point accordingly, they are neglecting one of the more important topics concerning etiquette of debate. When the opposition not only places their opinion but slanders me all the while, what do you expect me to do?

I do try to remain civil on these forums. I recognize that these are the official forums of FFXI and that everything regarding the ToS in FFXI is the same here. But it is my nature as a human (as you should admit, too) to get riled up when others are belittling me and my cause without giving either any proper recognition.

It's all opinions. I can deal with your opinion if you can deal with mine. If not, then what really entitles me to be respectful towards someone who just insults me, time and again? What really entitles them to continue to post and voice their opinion (all the while displaying their contempt for me) in further depth when:

- I already know their position.
- The topic has received no attention from a Rep or
- The topic has received an answer from a Rep.

I see no use in it. I can honestly say that yes, pixels do get me riled up. That's why I occasionally prevent them and myself from ever having to go further than necessary. When another person copies the idea of my topic and makes a new one - fine. When they continue to slander me - fine. I won't be a part of the discussion. I've gotten what I wanted from my own topic and that's enough for me.

I don't care if trolls abuse it. I don't care if you don't agree with me. I do what I want with my own topics and that's my business (and SE's, too, if they care enough), not yours.

[Tamoa]

If people are insulting you, use the report function (I think it's the 3rd time I point this out). However, some forum posters need to grow a thicker skin. Just because someone says "I think your idea is dumb", it doesn't really mean they are insulting you. However, if they go "You're dumb, your opinions are worthless, you suck @ FFXI, you're also fat, live in your mom's basement, have no job, no girlfriend/boyfriend, no life, go kill yourself" and any version/combination of statements like that, that's a different story.

And what you see as bickering, others may see as fun/interesting debate.

I really do not think the option to moderate any thread, even their own, should be left to the forum members.

[Paksenarrion]

I don't think that closing your own thread is a terrible thing, but there should be limits. There was a guy today posting a ton of threads and closing it right away. It's a DISCUSSION board for a reason. To DISCUSS.

I think threads that consist of only the original post, instead of being locked by a user, should just be outright deleted. And past that, maybe a daily limit on locking threads. Like 5? I like 5.

[Runespider]

I don't think that closing your own thread is a terrible thing, but there should be limits. There was a guy today posting a ton of threads and closing it right away. It's a DISCUSSION board for a reason. To DISCUSS.

He was doing it on purpose to try get them to remove the thread close option i guess, seems he might of got banned for it. Can hope anyway, doing stupid stuff like that.

[Paksenarrion]

He was doing it on purpose to try get them to remove the thread close option i guess, seems he might of got banned for it. Can hope anyway, doing stupid stuff like that.

Whatever it was for, I (And many others, as I could tell.) were annoyed by it. Would be best to just have the board delete the post for a post with no replies.

[Karbuncle]

Just to point out to the Community reps why the option to close your own thread is a bad idea.

one person is now going back and closing all of this threads, and creating new ones, getting 1 response, then closing them. Probably Because he's so awesome and trying to prove the point of this thread through the only means available, abusing the system to show them why its a bad idea.

If that isn't the finest example of bad-assery i don't know what is.

This clearly needs to be addressed, or at least have limitations. I.E if you close a thread you cannot re-open it ever. Or if you Close a thread you cannot create one for 24 hours. I think the option should be removed entirely.

If you can't handle what comes with making a thread (Bro-tip: Negative Comments, Positive Comments, Both!), Do not make a thread. Poster in no other forum reserve a "right" to close a thread, You don't deserve it here. It should be a mod only power.

[Bumbeen]

On two of them the mods unlocked them and I just relocked them lol.

[Karbuncle]

So you're doing this for us.

mmmm, Crusade onward, maybe they'll catch the drift?

(loleditedpost)

[Octaviane]

I think it's perfectly fine to close/lock your own thread, especially when a post made for fun turns into a brawl/hate fest against other players/forums/SE/Devs/Mods. That is not positive or useful discussion. To bad it seems to be the general direction most Forum users take these days. We all have opinions and are entitled to them, but it would be nice to see people lighten up and remember this is just a game.

[Raksha]

So you're doing this for us.

mmmm, Crusade onward, maybe they'll catch the drift?

(loleditedpost)


More than likely he'll just get banned and nothing will change.

Either way dudes locking their own threads is annoying and needs to be fixed.

[Korpg]

They probably put it in there because people complained that they couldn't close their threads when it derailed to the point of hysteria.

[Kraggy]

Take 'Bumbeen' for example, he's spamming threads then closing them, often without any replies. He's not seriously looking to start a discussion, that's obvious.

[Runespider]

On two of them the mods unlocked them and I just relocked them lol.

That's just sad lol

[Laraul]

Why would you want to respond to a thread that serves no purpose? Are these not the type of threads you are referring too?

[Jackastheripper]

I like the option. I have used it. It is great for when trolls and idiots come and derail a thread that has an actual purpose with flaming and such. I say keep it!

[Kraggy]

I like the option. I have used it. It is great for when trolls and idiots come and derail a thread that has an actual purpose with flaming and such. I say keep it!
That's what moderators are for.

Basically, as it stands right now, some moron can post rubbish about some game feature or whatever, then lock the thread so that his stupidity can't be countered, and folks coming along later who may not know about it would be mislead.

[Karbuncle]

I think it's perfectly fine to close/lock your own thread, especially when a post made for fun turns into a brawl/hate fest against other players/forums/SE/Devs/Mods. That is not positive or useful discussion. To bad it seems to be the general direction most Forum users take these days. We all have opinions and are entitled to them, but it would be nice to see people lighten up and remember this is just a game.

Mods/GM's/People-who-get-paid-to-do-this Should then Close the threads. It should not be at Player Discretion.

You know why? GMs/Devs are paid to be neutral, the OP is not. He can be whiny and close a thread just because someone says "I don't like your idea". Not everyone has as noble a cause and self control as you seem to make it sound.

The problem is just because while yes, you make it sound like a logical stop, not everyone who makes a thread is logical, and sometimes OP's close a thread simply because they didn't get the exact response they wanted.

It leads to people being unable to discuss topics.


I like the option. I have used it. It is great for when trolls and idiots come and derail a thread that has an actual purpose with flaming and such. I say keep it!

case and point. He not only closed his topic but now insults the posters in that topic, acting no better than they were.

People get power-hungry when they get the slightest bone tossed at them, they'll abuse the locking ability and more often than not make a snappy quip before locking the thread.

Its just something only Mods should do. No other forum allows you to lock your own thread for good reason, Average people aren't logical or Neutral, Devs/Gms are paid to be. even though they aren't perfect, they're fair more reasonable than the average poster.

[Korpg]

GMs might be paid, but I doubt any of the mods get paid at all.

[Korpg]

When your subject is changed to mean something else, why should you want it left open when the topic it was started on isnt the answers you are getting back are on a totally different subject. The thread yesterday turned form a discussion about lotting rules into a discussion about what linkshell rules should or should not apply. It had nothing to do with the topic needing to be discussed but the thread was hi jacked into a totally different discussion. This was why the original thread was closed. If people dont want to respond to the questions being asked but decide to go off topic why shouldnt the original op close it.

Because if the answer isn't one you don't like, and you close it because you don't like the answer, it is the same as running away from the main problem. Maybe your point of view is the one that is incorrect, not everyone else's point of view.

Think about that.

[Greatguardian]

GMs might be paid, but I doubt any of the mods get paid at all.

The moderators are the same people as the current GM staff. They handle both in-game and in-forum issues. For example, I've had some hilarious GM calls answered by Emdub.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxi/threads/3228-Where-s-Bacon-Mage?p=44035&viewfull=1#post44035

http://images.bluegartr.com/bucket/gallery/8070fe969194cd4274bfc5e8cc6f48a6.png

[Jackastheripper]

case and point. He not only closed his topic but now insults the posters in that topic, acting no better than they were.

I am not insulting anyone. If you go back and look at the ONE thread of mine I have closed, it got completely DERAILED by people who came in to purposely troll and flame it. They were in fact being idiots. I even gave 2 warnings asking that the thread please be brought back on track or I would close it. People didn't listen, so I did. I didn't say everyone in the topic was an idiot but by page 3 of postings, the thread by that point had absolutely nothing to do with the original post. I DON'T agree with people who close threads just because they get disagreed with. If you can't stand to have a discussion with people who both agree and disagree with you, you missed the point of a discussion. That kind of abuse is what makes people want an option like this gone. I DO agree with someone being able to close their own thread because trolls and idiots flame and derail it. This kind of abuse is what makes this option a great idea. Sadly, both sides of this coin can't be controlled by anyone. I stand by my previous statement.

[Tamoa]

My statement still stands, when you ask specifically for answer to If you could change the lotting system as it stood in SE what would you change, turned into some debate about linkshells right to make rules or not what the original topic was about at all.

Your post was more about warning threads and a roundabout way of saying you see nothing wrong in ninja lotting since it's not breaking the ToS. The "what would you change about the lotting system"-question was thrown in at the end as what seemed like an afterthought.

You were the one bringing up linkshell lotting rules etc - in your very first post. Doing that, you can't expect people not to respond to it.

[katiekat]

while i think locking your thread because you don't agree is wrong i do have to say both www.gamefaqs.com and www.gamespot.com let there users lock there own threads once they reach a sertin level of karma.

[Tamoa]

Actually it was a quote from someone else that i started as a new thread to start looking at a way to review the lotting system.

The first paragraph was a quote, yes - not the rest. The post can still be read here:
http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxi/threads/10564-Cultural-Lotting-Changes-now-with-no-risk-of-being-closed?p=134088&viewfull=1#post134088

[Karbuncle]

I love how the examples of abuse of power keep rolling in.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxi/threads/10661-Suggestion-casual-and-hardcore-flags.

Closed because people didn't agree. This power should be Rep/GM hands only...

[JiltedValkyrie]

Being able to close a thread is a necessary tool.

[Raxiaz]

There are WAY many more forums that allow their users to close their own threads. It is a necessary, basic fundamental tool of the rudimentary elements of ANY successful forum and denying its use for the every day user is just harmful. Moderators can tell you that the ability to lock threads (not by just moderators, but users as well) showed a decline in bad behavior among users.

Moderators aren't reading the forums 24-7. There is not a computer that scans human behavior based on text that meets a criteria and alerts moderators of a thread getting out of control. The thread creator should have the right to cease any new posts in their topic - whether you like it or not.

If you disagree with this, maybe you shouldn't come here any more. A lot of you seem against a lot of what SE is doing with their forum.

Arguing against it just because it's being abused is futile. Abuse happens everywhere. We shouldn't have politicians anywhere because there are politicians abusing their power. Yet good things come from some politicians. The same concept applies here, people.

[Raksha]

We have elections which determine who we want to be politicians, not everyone can just waltz in and start writing laws. No one elected you to be grand poobah in charge of thread closing.

Would it be ok to give parents the right to kill their children? Sure it might be abused in some cases, but then again lots of good could come from it.

That example too extreme for you? How about this. You go to poetry night at your local bar, start reciting your poems and ppl throw tomatoes at you. Do you have the right to force everyone out of the door and close the place down? Hint: the answer is no.

[Korpg]

We have elections which determine who we want to be politicians, not everyone can just waltz in and start writing laws.

That's right, the mobs of people who elect politicians to be lawmakers are the ones to blame for the corruption....err....another topic I guess.

[Raxiaz]

That's a horrible example. And elections still elect corrupt politicians. And some countries do allow parents to kill their children - it's called abortion. Lots of bad, and lots of good. Depends on how you look at it.

Thread closing being an option to the thread creator is still a better, more effective way of "moderating" a forum. You can't change this, no matter what you say.

[Korpg]

I kindof made an unintended point.

Not only do we not need a close thread option, but we as forum users and posters need to learn a little moderation ourselves.

I mean yeah, sure, we could get out of hand without realizing it every now and then, but still....

[Greatguardian]

This is ticking me off.

I spent 10 minutes writing a nice page-long response to the "Introduce yourself" thread, and when I click reply the forums are just all "Blah blah the thread is locked, suckah!"

Threads are open less than a day now and people ragequit and lock them before they even hit 3 pages? I am so sick of this feature.

[Korpg]

Actually, he moved that thread to a renamed thread, I guess he didn't know you could rename the thread yourself.

[Raxiaz]

I did rename it, but the change did not affect what is displayed on the topic list.

I apologize for your inconvenience Greatguardian.

*future SE rep* (but no really, sorry, man)

[Raksha]

That's a horrible example. And elections still elect corrupt politicians.


Sure, but there is gonna be a metric shitload more corruption if people start writing their own laws though.



And some countries do allow parents to kill their children - it's called abortion


fetus =/= child, but let's not get into that argument.



Thread closing being an option to the thread creator is still a better, more effective way of "moderating" a forum. You can't change this, no matter what you say.


I have yet to see a single thread closed by the OP which I think deserved it.

EDIT: Also, what about poetry night?

[Raxiaz]

I knew I missed something. The poetry night example was skewed, as well. Internet, anonymity rules; in real life, there is no anonymity. People will hold their opinions whether you like it or not. Just because I close a topic doesn't mean someone else can make a new one and restate the ideas/arguments there.

"I have yet to see a single thread closed by the OP which I think deserved it."

Bold: where your argument is flawed.

[Raksha]

"I have yet to see a single thread closed by the OP which I think deserved it."

Bold: where your argument is flawed.

Yeah well unless you have some objective criteria with which to judge whether or not a thread should be closed, then we are basically arguing our opinions.

[Greatguardian]

I did rename it, but the change did not affect what is displayed on the topic list.

I apologize for your inconvenience Greatguardian.

*future SE rep* (but no really, sorry, man)

Well that makes more sense. D'oh.

[Raxiaz]

It is a matter of opinion. The thread creator can close their own topics if they feel it won't be beneficial to anyone to continue the thread in the context of the topic.

I have my own criteria for closing my topics:

1. Has it been responded to by a representative in a positive or negative manner?
2. Is the thread generating any meaningful discussion?

If 2 is always true, I will never close my topics. There is nothing meaningful in "you're so lazy you won't buy a warp cudgel." The same holds true for "you can't do basic math." I don't care what supporting details there are for those statements - they're still meaningless and hold nothing of value to me or anyone else short of the poster's own e-peen. Thus the topic gets closed - and if someone wants to continue it elsewhere, that's perfectly fine with me.

[Karbuncle]

The fact people so adamantly deny wanting to lose the power to close threads, something that should have remained a moderator/Rep/GM power to begin with, is just proof of how power hungry people get when they get a taste of it.

I reiterate my original point, Posters are not neutral, they are biased, if a thread they create doesn't go like they want it, they can lock it, even if other posters were right in the middle of a interesting debate. Sometimes people debate things that can actually lead to decent information, but now unless you keep it directly on the OPs topic 9/10 You're getting a thread-lock and a smart-a** comment by some arrogant fool who thinks he's gods hand because he can close a thread.

Its too much power for the average poster. Rather you want to come out of your whole and accept it or not, When you create a thread on any internet forum, You have basically just signed an agreement to accept any positives and negatives that come with making a thread, this is of course withing the extent the rules of the forum dictate.

If something is truly in need of closing, a GM Will do it. Plain and simple, Look around, they do it all the time. This power needs to be removed. It leaves room for absolutely nothing but petty abuse of the system.

While obviously very subjective, I have yet to see one single positive example of why someone closing their own thread should remain. Every time i see a locked thread its either a GM (as it should be) or some OP Who didn't like where the topic was going (Rather it was meaningful discussion or not) and closed it.

It should not be up to players to decide when to lock a thread, Again, They are not neutral, they are biased. GMS/Reps/Mods/etc are pretty much bound by rules and paid to be neutral. It should be their duty. Look at many of the threads started by an OP who doesn't Rage-Lock a thread at the first sign of disagreeance or deviation from the OP.

Ones that go on for multiple pages. Chances our the Conversation has deviated from the OP in some areas, and some areas the conversations get a little heated, but all in all, good information eventually surfaces, and theres something to learn from it, because sometimes heated debate is where some of the better information comes from.

Would i agree that being civil all the time would be better? Hell yes, But you can't expect that of humans anymore than you can expect the earth to stop spinning, and sadly your basic poster does not seem to understand that.

If the discussion got too "heated" again, GMs, Report button. It works.

[Ravenmore]

Everytime some one closes a thread should start another one with thier last response as the opener. Couple people are already doing this.

I was in the middle of the lastest relic/emp when it got to mystics and got lock.

[Runespider]

Most people don't see a problem withthis forum feature, some do. Hmm reminiscent of another thread..

Anyway Square obviously see value in it no matter what anyone else says, I doubt they will change it so learn to live with it or don't post anymore? :P

I do think they should be dealing with people abusing it though.

[Raxiaz]

Opinion, opinion, opinion - can you give me one real fact why people shouldn't be able to close their own threads? All I'm hearing is "Wahh, wahh, wahh, I can't put my opinion on teh intarwebz."

[Khiinroye]

People can also reopen threads that the GMs have closed for being offtopic or flamefests.

[Korpg]

Opinion, opinion, opinion - can you give me one real fact why people shouldn't be able to close their own threads? All I'm hearing is "Wahh, wahh, wahh, I can't put my opinion on teh intarwebz."

Because I can just reopen any thread that is closed as my own and even quote the first closed thread in both original topic and first post?

That is one real fact why people shouldn't have the option of closing threads, it causes clutter in the forum, because I'll just reopen it under my name.

[Raxiaz]

That's when the delete button comes in handy.

[Korpg]

And the debate rages on.
If you start a topic that is based on let say FFXI and it changes to become a cooking discussion, what you are saying is the original person who wanted to know about ffxi doesnt have the right to close the thread down because its not staying on topic but you want to pay someone else to go close it down for you because you like to see the topic ffxi being used to discuss cooking.

Because if the topic went from playing Paladin to cooking a pie, by terms of service agreement we all made when we signed up to this forum that is an automatic banable offence. This forum is for FFXI and FFXI only. Why do you think it is called "FFXI official forum?"

Now, if the topic goes from "Relic/Mystic/Emp staves are worthless" to "Summoner Melee is worthless" then that is, by extension, on topic. Because which of the jobs able to equip any relic/mystic/emp staves are able to melee without compromising their set role? Is it plausible for a BLM or SCH to melee when they are supposed to be nuking? Only SMN can get away with meleeing, because the people who let the SMN melee are too....<insert derogatory comment here>...to know otherwise. But yeah, it is still on topic.

[Greatguardian]

Opinion, opinion, opinion - can you give me one real fact why people shouldn't be able to close their own threads? All I'm hearing is "Wahh, wahh, wahh, I can't put my opinion on teh intarwebz."

Simple. The option to close your own thread directly allows players to open threads that a GM has locked.

I'd imagine their web designer is getting a reaming sometime today, but I highly doubt there's anything they can do to fix it aside from simply removing the OP ability to open/close threads.

[katiekat]

my question to thos for getting rid of the close topic button is this. say i ask for a clarification on sum thing the dev's post and it is ancerd why should i not be alaed to lock it? the post was ancerd why keep it open?

i ask because am on the fence about this i see both sides and thus cane make up my mind

[Alienmonkey]

Because there is still valuable discussion to be had after a community rep answers.

[Karbuncle]

And the debate rages on.
If you start a topic that is based on let say FFXI and it changes to become a cooking discussion, what you are saying is the original person who wanted to know about ffxi doesnt have the right to close the thread down because its not staying on topic but you want to pay someone else to go close it down for you because you like to see the topic ffxi being used to discuss cooking.

That seems like an Extreme example, But to answer this extreme example, Its a GMs/Moderator's Job to do this. Not ours. If a topic goes off your discussion into fruit pies, No its not your right to close a thread, Its your right to report the people doing it so a GM closes it. But no, It should not be your right to do it yourself.

Again I make the argument, Common folk aren't neutral, They're biased petty insecure people who for the most part can't handle disagreement or constructive criticism. giving them the power to stop everything is simply asking for this forum to deteriorate into locked topics and undiscussed conversations.

Hell you can even unlock a thread when a GM locked it. Somethings wrong with that too.


Opinion, opinion, opinion - can you give me one real fact why people shouldn't be able to close their own threads? All I'm hearing is "Wahh, wahh, wahh, I can't put my opinion on teh intarwebz."

Can you give me some facts on why we should keep it? All i hear is "Waah waah waah I want to be able to deny and stop anyones voice or opinion at a moments notice because i can't handle constructive criticism"

Point is, Locking a thread is a mod power, and should stay as such. If you feel your topic is going away from what you wanted, who gives a frock, If a conversation got to the point it was off topic and nothing positive was coming from it, a GM would lock the thread. As it should be.

Conversations will almost never stay 100% on topic. Side-Conversaitons/debates happen on every website. Most of these are productive and generally lead to some positive information. Some aren't. Those that aren't get deleted/Locked, Those that are now also get deleted/locked if the OP is incapable of handling the fact his topic isn't being discussed in the butt-kissing manner he had hoped.

This leads to an unhealthy environment for discussion, because if the OP decide this discussion isn't worth his time, thread is locked, and conversation ends.

You can always re-open the topic by starting a new one, But then i ask you, why bother having a lock thread option if its possible to simply start another thread quoting the OP and continue the discussion, making the entire locking pointless to begin with?


my question to thos for getting rid of the close topic button is this. say i ask for a clarification on sum thing the dev's post and it is ancerd why should i not be alaed to lock it? the post was ancerd why keep it open?

i ask because am on the fence about this i see both sides and thus cane make up my mind

Thats probably the kind of thing people had in mind when they instituted this, and is the only positive reasoning behind the entire patch.

But also remember sometimes a lot is left to be discussed after a Dev response, Especially the actual response.

[katiekat]

i would like to get a rep's response to this topic see what SE thinks

[Karbuncle]

i would like to get a rep's response to this topic see what SE thinks

This conversation is far to "heated" to see a Rep response i think :X. Plus they might not even be able to comment on Website issues?

[Daniel_Hatcher]

Could just do it if they don't want to remove it that the thread can not be reopened when locked and that you can't open multiple topics for a set period of time in between opening one.

[Karbuncle]

Could just do it if they don't want to remove it that the thread can not be reopened when locked and that you can't open multiple topics for a set period of time in between opening one.

While good, It wouldn't solve the core problem.

Which is only that some people simply should not be given the power to lock threads. Because if you check all the player locked threads they're either

A) Mockingly Locked (locked because they can/for fun/to show its abuse)

B) Locked because the OP Didn't like where conversation was going
*B2 Generally When the above happens, The OP leaves a Snarky-Aggressive "I am god" response before locking

C) Legitimately locked because OP Got an answer to his question
*C2 Sometimes conversation within the thread aren't properly fleshed. More information could come from this thread to help future readers.

--- The problem is A and B outweigh C 100 to 1, and sometimes C isn't even that positive*. Which is why i say the System is open for abuse. its not that it wasn't a good idea on paper, Its just common posters should not have that power, because it leads to pettiness and abuse.

*For instance, Say you're having a discussion on merits for XXX job, a few people respond, and it turns into a better/worse debate on pros/cons of those merits. however the OP Decides "I got enough info" and locks the thread. Now a debate which could help future readers (I.E fully learning pros and cons of certain merit choices) has been shut down, unfinished.

[Daniel_Hatcher]

While good, It wouldn't solve the core problem.

Which is only that some people simply should not be given the power to lock threads. Because if you check all the player locked threads they're either

A) Mockingly Locked (locked because they can/for fun/to show its abuse)

B) Locked because the OP Didn't like where conversation was going
*B2 Generally When the above happens, The OP leaves a Snarky-Aggressive "I am god" response before locking

C) Legitimately locked because OP Got an answer to his question
*C2 Sometimes conversation within the thread aren't properly fleshed. More information could come from this thread to help future readers.

--- The problem is A and B outweigh C 100 to 1, and sometimes C isn't even that positive*. Which is why i say the System is open for abuse. its not that it wasn't a good idea on paper, Its just common posters should not have that power, because it leads to pettiness and abuse.

*For instance, Say you're having a discussion on merits for XXX job, a few people respond, and it turns into a better/worse debate on pros/cons of those merits. however the OP Decides "I got enough info" and locks the thread. Now a debate which could help future readers (I.E fully learning pros and cons of certain merit choices) has been shut down, unfinished.

True enough, I suppose they could add a vote to unlock?!

It's tricky because it's a decent idea as it allows less strict moderating, but obviously as said it can and is being abused.

[Karbuncle]

True enough, I suppose they could add a vote to unlock?!

It's tricky because it's a decent idea as it allows less strict moderating, but obviously as said it can and is being abused.

Yah, I think their idea with implementing it was for threads that are simply 1 question. like "which merit should i get for THF?" etc. they were probably thinking "They can ask a question, get an answer, and close the thread!"

or maybe they were just being really lazy and thought giving us that power would ease their load?

Either way, any positives (which i acknowledge 1 or 2) are far outweighed by the fact 9/10 its generally just abused by OPs who can't take constructive criticism or the fact sometimes topics dont always stay on topic and might deviate and close a thread.

If a topic gets too far out of hand obviously a GM Would close it. Or the posters would get it deleted by the GM staff if they get reported. So we have that safety net.

[katiekat]

that mite be a good counter balince to this if sum one locks a topic thos that posted in it can vote to unlock it

[Karbuncle]

that mite be a good counter balince to this if sum one locks a topic thos that posted in it can vote to unlock it

This would make a lot of sense.

However it seems like a lot of additional effort when the basic problem can be solved by removing this option in the first place.

[katiekat]

This would make a lot of sense.

However it seems like a lot of additional effort when the basic problem can be solved by removing this option in the first place.

i think in the end it comes down to taking it away would make mor work for the mods so they most likely wont

[blowfin]

A lot of the threads on this forum could do with being closed a lot earlier. This one included, before one of you gets a hernia.

I mean if the OP is happy that the discussion has reached a conclusion, they should have the right to close it IHMO. If people are abusing it they need to be dealt with. Pretty simple stuff.

[Raxiaz]

There are pros and cons to both sides yes...

And it's very doable to keep the OP power to open/close threads but to have a GM's close over-ride anything the creator can say. Possibly much easier to code than anything in FFXI, too.

[JackDaniels]

So the forum moderators give us the option to close our own threads and open threads that have been closed by the mods themselves. Would you like to know why? Because they erase (without any warning) any threads that they don't like for whatever personal reason.

I've noticed a couple threads have simply vanished lately. This is more upstanding conduct from SE representatives, we should really expect no less (or more as the case may be) from anyone affiliated with the company.

[Tamoa]

A lot of the threads on this forum could do with being closed a lot earlier. This one included, before one of you gets a hernia.


I see no reason why this thread needs to be closed. There is still discussion going on, and as far as I can tell it hasn't derailed and noone's resorted to name calling or pulling the rl card.

[Korpg]

I see no reason why this thread needs to be closed. There is still discussion going on, and as far as I can tell it hasn't derailed and noone's resorted to name calling or pulling the rl card.

You suck, your family sucks, and your dog sucks!

[Raxiaz]

The thread needs to be closed because nothing meaningful can come out of it, period.

[Tamoa]

The thread needs to be closed because nothing meaningful can come out of it, period.

That's your opinion.

This is the General Discussion section of the forum. I will leave it up to a forum mod to decide if this thread needs to be closed.

[blowfin]

I see no reason why this thread needs to be closed. There is still discussion going on, and as far as I can tell it hasn't derailed and noone's resorted to name calling or pulling the rl card.

If you can call opinions being forced down people's throats discussion, sure.

[Karbuncle]

If you can call opinions being forced down people's throats discussion, sure.

No ones forcing you to believe the opinions or read the thread. Discussion is discussion. people are passionate about their beliefs on subjects.

Its the reason forums as a whole work.

[Ravenmore]

Yeah one of the people opening and closing thier threads over and over is getting reported all you can do maybe the mods will get the hint.

[blowfin]

No ones forcing you to believe the opinions or read the thread. Discussion is discussion. people are passionate about their beliefs on subjects.

Its the reason forums as a whole work.

Where did I say I was being forced to believe anything? My first entry into the conversation is on this page, it was a general observation. I've exercised my own judgement to read and post in this thread because frankly, it's ludicrous. About the only thing trying to be forced on ME right now is the holistic forum BS you're spouting. Case in point really.

[Karbuncle]

Where did I say I was being forced to believe anything?

If you can call opinions being forced down people's throats discussion, sure.

Right there. You're saying our opinions are being "Forced' Down your throat, meaning you're being forced to accept and or gurgle on our opinions.

You are not. You are not being forced to read our opinions or accept them. Our Opinions are in no one "Forced" Down anyones throat. Thats how i took it anyway, Which is why i responded. If it was a misunderstanding your incredibly teenage angst isn't required, a simple correction would have sufficed.


My first entry into the conversation is on this page, it was a general observation. I've exercised my own judgement to read and post in this thread because frankly, it's ludicrous.

I only responded to the one in my quotes. Y9ur first post was not the subject of my interests.


About the only thing trying to be forced on ME right now is the holistic forum BS you're spouting. Case in point really.

So now we're going to play the "You're from BG" Card? maybe i'll throw back your own terrible anger issues back at you.


About the only thing being forced on ME right now is reading this 2nd grade anger-issue rage bullock brought about by some guy overreacting to a completely non-offensive nor insulting post.

Fixed for relevance to me. Seriously, How does anything i posted in your quote even remotely warrant you unbound rage thrown at my face? I thought it was worded rather nicely.

Edited: Also the forum jumped back a post, I half expected to see stuff being deleted by mods because someone spam reported...

[Korpg]

Off topic: Why would anyone buy a stack of dragon meat on AH for 350k and then resell it for 330k?

Isn't that the wrong way to make money?

[Karbuncle]

From what i can tell it appears katz is going back and deleting all of his posts.

[Ravenmore]

Off topic: Why would anyone buy a stack of dragon meat on AH for 350k and then resell it for 330k?

Isn't that the wrong way to make money?

All I can think of is some one messed up and bought the wrong thing and decided to take a loss to get ride of it fast. Don't ask me how they would make that kind of a mistake since only other thing i can think of that starts with "Dragon" is bloods and hearts. Bloods I check the other day were going for 1k for singles. Wyvern scales I seen a should for 400k for 2 stacks but again thats a really big f*** up.

[Korpg]

All I can think of is some one messed up and bought the wrong thing and decided to take a loss to get ride of it fast. Don't ask me how they would make that kind of a mistake since only other thing i can think of that starts with "Dragon" is bloods and hearts. Bloods I check the other day were going for 1k for singles. Wyvern scales I seen a should for 400k for 2 stacks but again thats a really big f*** up.

Well, I would have thought so too, except this guy has been doing it for months now. I'm not sure if he is either trying to lower the price of stacks of dragon meats or a little special in the head.

[Kensagaku]

@blowfin

How does any of it consist of forcing opinions down throats? I'm certainly not seeing it. I see two sides of a debate, with both trying to argue their view on it. By choosing to read the thread, you choose to see the content within it. There's no force involved, just a willing choice to see what is in it. All that we have here is one side, who feels that the whole option of closing one's own thread can and is being abused, and the other side, which sees potential use for the ability to close threads and positives from their perspective. It's a simple debate, and if we cannot share our opinions, then what's the point of this forum? To bow down and say "Yes sir/m'am!" to every thread opener so that they can get a sense of pride over some little internet achievement? Yeah no.

You're just attacking the thread without adding anything meaningful to the discussion. If you don't feel that the feature should be removed, you're entitled to your opinion and your right to voice it here. That's the point of this thread; to get an idea of how people feel on the matter, and to express points from both sides. It may or may not change anything, but people are entitled to that right. If anyone's forcing an opinion down peoples' throats, it's you.

@Korpg (I spelled it right this time. D: )

Could be trying to lower the prices overall. Dunno, something like that, I guess.


On topic...

Reading through the posts, I'm still not convinced that being able to close one's own thread is a good idea. Karby gave a good example that I'm having a hard time expanding on: people generally don't close a thread because it's been "legitimately answered." For the most part people close a thread because they either don't get the answer they want, or they want to save face. Usually both. Discussions get cut off, or possible debate that could perhaps clarify or improve on a situation is taken away before it can reach its end. I honestly can't think of many ways that it's good to be able to close your own thread. Maybe if it got far too derailed/trolled (unless it was a terrible topic such as how gil needs to be green or something) it would be worth closing to end it, but for the most part there's far more negative to it than positive.

[Linh]

If the topic really matters to you, and you weren't the OP, then you create a thread to continue it.

[Karbuncle]

If the topic really matters to you, and you weren't the OP, then you create a thread to continue it.

Then why have the ability to lock a thread to begin with if theres such an easy work around? seems kinda pointless to have a power to stop a discussion when anybody can immediately re-open it.

Contradicting the entire reasoning behind it to begin with... :\

[Linh]

Then why have the ability to lock a thread to begin with if theres such an easy work around? seems kinda pointless to have a power to stop a discussion when anybody can immediately re-open it.

Contradicting the entire reasoning behind it to begin with... :\

It's not stopping the discussion if you create a thread to continue it.

[Karbuncle]

It's not stopping the discussion if you create a thread to continue it.

Yes thats precisely my point.

If the point of the Closing your own thread option was to stop discussion at OP's discretion, would not simply recreating a thread backpedal the entire point of that power in the first place?

making the power as a whole meaningless when there is such a simple work around...

(I Don't think you understood me right >.<)

[Linh]

Yes thats precisely my point.

If the point of the Closing your own thread option was to stop discussion at OP's discretion, would not simply recreating a thread backpedal the entire point of that power in the first place?

making the power as a whole meaningless when there is such a simple work around...

(I Don't think you understood me right >.<)

But the discussion was able to continue...

[Eeek]

But the discussion was able to continue...

But now, the front page is a mess of rage-locked threads and their duplicates. It looks messy and it pushes a variety of otherwise worthwhile threads off the front page.

Thread discussions that would normally continue for days are artificially stunted when threads slip off the front page. That loss of visibility does impact thread discussions. I, like many other posters and non-posting browsers, usually will not spend the time reading through discussions off the front page.

The current clutter negatively affects the visibility and variety of live discussions on the front page, and General Discussion suffers as a result.

[Korpg]

Until the first original poster of the butthurt thread who deleted everything to try to save face decided to complain to a mod stating that slander was issued by everyone against the butthurt poster.

You try to defend your thread and calmly state that they are oversensitive and most likely attention whores and wished to continue to show them how much wrong their original thread/idea was. But any constructive criticism in their eyes is the same as slander.

Mods should only have the power to shutdown threads. And any threads opened/reopened right away from shutdown threads should also be deleted and that poster banned.

Heck, I hope that the one who constantly cried slander and such was banned for being too thinned-skinned.

[Eeek]

Yeah, I think far too many posters associate friendly disagreements and discussion as slander, flaming, and trolling. Not everyone will share the same opinion and viewpoint on every subject, and not all ideas are good ones. That's life, really.

Forums would be so boring if everyone agreed on everything.

[Korpg]

Yeah, I think far too many posters associate friendly disagreements and discussion as slander, flaming, and trolling. Not everyone will share the same opinion and viewpoint on every subject, and not all ideas are good ones. That's life, really.

Forums would be so boring if everyone agreed on everything.

Oh, I don't care if they agree with me or not, or if we share the same opinion, which in this previous case we didn't.

What bugs me besides the fact that that one poster made a lie out of me, was that he was so quick to throw slander into the pot but wouldn't accept the fact that he is dishing out just as much "slander" as he says he was receiving. He doesn't realize that he is just as guilty of "breaking the rules" as anyone else is, even though no rules were broken.

[Karbuncle]

Oh, I don't care if they agree with me or not, or if we share the same opinion, which in this previous case we didn't.

What bugs me besides the fact that that one poster made a lie out of me, was that he was so quick to throw slander into the pot but wouldn't accept the fact that he is dishing out just as much "slander" as he says he was receiving. He doesn't realize that he is just as guilty of "breaking the rules" as anyone else is, even though no rules were broken.

Shouldn't read too far into it. Everyone, probably even the reps and GMs, Could tell he was massively saving face and pulling out.

Don't let it get to you :\

[Korpg]

Shouldn't read too far into it. Everyone, probably even the reps and GMs, Could tell he was massively saving face and pulling out.

Don't let it get to you :\

Well, I want some explanation as to why the following post was deleted:


AKA destroying evidence.

or is saying that you destroyed evidence a slanderous response?

How is that a slanderous post that SE claimed it was?

[Karbuncle]

Well, I want some explanation as to why the following post was deleted:



How is that a slanderous post that SE claimed it was?

It wasn't. Its not really a big secret you can get any post deleted at any time if you spam report enough for a vague enough reason.

Its abused all the time. Its why these forums frankly are dangerous. Because it seems like nothing is actually moderated, Its just "oh, 4 reports? should i read it... nah, 4 reports is enough, /DELETE"

I think the GM staff was just "Thrown" at the website. Cause i know Baccan is an in-game and Forum GM. Double the work now and probably no extra pay, I can imagine they must not be very happy with it. They are after all, only human.

[Korpg]

It wasn't. Its not really a big secret you can get any post deleted at any time if you spam report enough for a vague enough reason.

Its abused all the time. Its why these forums frankly are dangerous. Because it seems like nothing is actually moderated, Its just "oh, 4 reports? should i read it... nah, 4 reports is enough, /DELETE"

So basically not enough people are reporting hordecore then? I report him almost every time he makes a thread (except for that BLU spell cooldown thread, it actually had 1 good point, not reportable offense).

[Karbuncle]

So basically not enough people are reporting hordecore then? I report him almost every time he makes a thread (except for that BLU spell cooldown thread, it actually had 1 good point, not reportable offense).

Pretty much. I've seen posts that *luckily* got SS'd before they were deleted that weren't insulting nor offensive in any way, They simply disagreed with another person. That post got deleted, But the post he was responding to did not, (which was frankly far more offensive).

Maybe its off and on, But I've definitely seen very non-offensive statements deleted by a mod which seemingly the only reasonable explination could be someone spammed report.

[Korpg]

Don't they have a list of people who spam report? Why not take that "privilege" away from them?

[Karbuncle]

Don't they have a list of people who spam report? Why not take that "privilege" away from them?

They might. I don't know.

I just can't think of any other legitimate reason why certain posts I've seen get deleted, While i see ones that are 10x worse sitting up.

[Korpg]

They should also take away the ability to delete posts.

Too many people want to try to save face and delete their own posts to try to make themselves look good in a week.

"You can't say I said that, I deleted that post, so you can't prove I said that"

"I didn't intent to defame you, I'm sorry you thought that way, so I'm going to delete any evidence as to otherwise."

Actually, if SE actually gets hard on trolls again, it might make this forum somewhat reasonable again.

[Raxiaz]

You're basically asking for every fundamental aspect of a forum to be removed. Next thing you know you'll be asking to take away the edit feature. Just stop while you still can.

[Korpg]

Ok, what about the ability to delete more than 2 posts a day?

There might be some reason why somebody would genuinely need to delete a post, but to delete everything one said in a thread, isn't that going to far?

[Khiinroye]

Most forums I've been to don't let you lock / unlock / override mod locks / delete posts that have been responded to.

[Raxiaz]

No forum limits a poster's ability to delete their own posts. The only kind of restrictions I've ever seen on a forum were:

Cannot post more than 2 messages per 2 minutes (prevents spam, includes topics).
Cannot edit/delete own post until a certain user level has been reached.
Cannot make more than X topics/posts per day below a certain user level.

Personally, I really liked GameFAQS's message board system. It's been heavily adjusted lately - edit feature was recently added in the last year or so. The features it provided were not what made it so good, though. The thing about GameFAQS is that you had to earn the ability to post regularly. You had to earn the ability to make more than 3 topics a day. You had to earn the ability to lock your own topics.

I think SE should follow their example and set up a similar system for their own official forums. Keep everything as is, but only give it to users who have earned it through posting enough. Users who have proven that they're 2 cents is worth taking more than 3 times a day. Personally, if they took it a step further and required that you had a job level over 30 as a restriction before having some privilege, I'd be all for it. Already getting nauseated at the numerous people hiding behind mules.

Doing this fixes a lot of issues the majority here seem to have with these forums. Joe-blow can't make an account and slap a mule on it then go spam the forums, locking every topic he creates.

[Camate]

Thanks for bringing up your concerns about this. We are currently looking into addressing this.

[Raxiaz]

I hope your adjustments come swiftly, then.

[Alhanelem]

The thing about GameFAQS is that you had to earn the ability to post regularly. You had to earn the ability to make more than 3 topics a day. You had to earn the ability to lock your own topics.The thing is, the GameFAQs boards are massive- it's one of the biggest forums out there. They need to be strict because with more total users comes more bad users. These forums are not that big.

I'm OK with a thread lock feature, but I think the use of it should be restricted in frequency, and users should not be able to unlock threads after locking them.

[Malamasala]

Thanks for bringing up your concerns about this. We are currently looking into addressing this.

We all better lock as many threads as we can before they fix it!

[ShadowHeart]

ok for example i have made threads in the past just making casual conversations or asking a simple question and trolls start all over it for no reason derailing thread and destroying the whole point trying to be made or question trying to be asked. So I personally have deleted threads i have posted but for valid reasons to reason to have troll bashing in any forums / threads I know it will forever exist but to decide whether to delte your post is no different then to edit your own post and making it blank etc to me but u still see all the troll brigade walking on.... worrying about people deleting the post they made is one of the last things people should have to worry about lol

[Karbuncle]

ok for example i have made threads in the past just making casual conversations or asking a simple question and trolls start all over it for no reason derailing thread and destroying the whole point trying to be made or question trying to be asked. So I personally have deleted threads i have posted but for valid reasons to reason to have troll bashing in any forums / threads I know it will forever exist but to decide whether to delte your post is no different then to edit your own post and making it blank etc to me but u still see all the troll brigade walking on.... worrying about people deleting the post they made is one of the last things people should have to worry about lol

This has been brought up. No I don't believe you should do it, a GM Should. You should report the trolling posts and a GM/Moderator will come and lock the thread and take action against those who made the bad posts. Really from your point of view wouldn't this be better? not only do you get the thread locked, the alleged "Trollers' Get their posts deleted too.

After being on these forums for less than a week I already knew half of the posters here had no idea what the hell a troll was or how to take constructive criticism, They should not have the power to determine when a thread gets locked because most of them can barely have the power to understand how, Just because someone disagrees with you, doesn't make them a troll.

Also, I admit there are some positives to locking your own thread. I.E you ask a question, it gets answered, Problem solved/close. However its the Bads that outweigh the goods because not every OP can use his brain. 9/10 a thread thats locked by the OP goes like this:

OP:"I think XXX would be cool, we should add it"
Others: "I don't like this idea, for xxx reasons"
Others2: "I agree with others, it just seems bad"
OP:"You're all trolls and idiots Im closing this thread"

the problem is simply that while there are 1-2 positives for this power, its overshadowed by the fact people get "power hungry" when they get a taste of power, It goes to their head, and it easily becomes abused.

[Malamasala]

You are aware that the only one that looks like a troll, is the person who deletes his post, right? So if you have any delusions about deleting your own post to counter trolls, it is about time to wake up.

[katz]

So what you are saying is if you start a thread that is potentially badly worded and other people twist the meaning of your words to suggest it means something other than the intended point of view, we shouldnt have the right to remove that. What is the difference between editing or deleting posts or threads if someone is going to manipulate the words to mean what they think you were saying to the point that everyone else believes that was your intention in the first place. I am for moderators to be sent messages to remove these points, I just think its an awful lot of work if some people continually change the meaning of other peoples points of view to make them look like they are saying something else.

[Pharaun]

So what you are saying is if you start a thread that is potentially badly worded and other people twist the meaning of your words to suggest it means something other than the intended point of view, we shouldnt have the right to remove that. What is the difference between editing or deleting posts or threads if someone is going to manipulate the words to mean what they think you were saying to the point that everyone else believes that was your intention in the first place. I am for moderators to be sent messages to remove these points, I just think its an awful lot of work if some people continually change the meaning of other peoples points of view to make them look like they are saying something else.

In a situation like that the OP just needs to learn to articulate their argument better. A clearly worded, concise argument is very difficult, if not impossible for someone else to misconstrue.

Specifically on topic, in general it all comes down to who actually has ownership of a thread (this is in a general sense because we all know that SE "owns" all the threads on this forum). Does a thread belong solely to the person who started it, or does it belong to the community of people that are taking part in the discussion? I believe that it belongs to the group because often a thread can move on to cover subjects not strictly related to the original post, and still be extremely valuable and useful to the community as a whole. As a result giving the power to lock threads to a biased individual, and the OP is always a biased individual, is inherently a bad idea.

There is a reason why there is a neutral group of moderators appointed to, well, moderate the forums. Ideally they are able to look at every thread and post from an unbiased perspective and make judgements on what needs to be moderated or left alone. I've never seen a successful form that gives this kind of authority to all the posters. I'm not saying that kind of forum can't exist, but it requires that the overwhelming majority of the posters actually behave like adults, and unfortunately that just won't happen here.

[katz]

So if English isnt your 1st language, we shouldnt post, very diplomatically put of saying dont post if your not english. Hell why not just say if you dont have your english qualifications you shouldnt post. Lets discriminate against that category of people too.
See how easy words can be twisted to mean something else.

Free speech and respect of others should apply.

[katz]

If we do decide on not allowing others to delete or close threads,Id also like the ability of quoting other people to be changed so that the whole message is copied and not changed ie the whole quote is put in and not manipulated by others. If this is too much traffic on the board then just the ability to refer people back to the original post number and no quotes allowed.

[Cream_Soda]

If we do decide on not allowing others to delete or close threads,Id also like the ability of quoting other people to be changed so that the whole message is copied and not changed ie the whole quote is put in and not manipulated by others. If this is too much traffic on the board then just the ability to refer people back to the original post number and no quotes allowed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FS_NGF8WRG4

[Korpg]

So if English isnt your 1st language, we shouldnt post, very diplomatically put of saying dont post if your not english. Hell why not just say if you dont have your english qualifications you shouldnt post. Lets discriminate against that category of people too.
See how easy words can be twisted to mean something else.

Nobody said that you can't post if English isn't your first language, but it will be harder to be understood if English is not your first language and you post in an English forum. Think about it. Would you post in English on a Japanese language only forum? Think you would be understood by everyone there?


Free speech and respect of others should apply.

There is no such thing as free speech online. There are also no such thing as respect online.

And I'm 100% serious about this.

[katz]

I have respectfully asked you not to make comments about my comments. You have forced me to take further action.

"This message is hidden because Korpg is on your ignore list. "

[Karbuncle]

I have respectfully asked you not to make comments about my comments. You have forced me to take further action.

"This message is hidden because Korpg is on your ignore list. "

Oh snap, I can't miss this opportunity. Hey, I'm quoting you and typing, Please block me too.

[katz]

Oh snap, I can't miss this opportunity. Hey, I'm quoting you and typing, Please block me too.
Why should I block you, you have valid discussion points, havent tried to manipulate what I quote, havent broken any forum rules (to my knowledge).

[Raxiaz]

Now the topic must be closed because nothing but immaturity can come of it.

Really, when will it end?

[Karbuncle]

Now the topic must be closed because nothing but immaturity can come of it.

Really, when will it end?

You see Billy, when it comes to the internet. it will never end. If you will turn your attention to exhibit A:

Exhibit A: Anonymity.
*People, normal people, Will act like idiots/a**holes/jerks online simply because they see it more as an alter-ego where they can do what they want with little consequence.

Exhibit B: Audiences.
*People will further act like the above in an attempt to be cool, or fit in, with the "internet click" that is a forum. This further exacerbates the problems in Exhibit A.

**Please note this startling revelation is brought to you by Pennyarcade!

The problem with any forum Is that for the most part, people can/will say what they wouldn't normally say IRL, because it bares little consequence on a forum. Its not that i enjoy this prospect, in fact its rather annoying when i have to listen to Saint preachalot babble on about how the forum should be a sacred holy ground for any and all bad ideas and anyone who disagrees with an idea is burned at the stake as a troll. Or expect a forum topic to always stay on topic.

Its a problem that comes with all internet forums. However if you ask me, the FFXI Official forums are by far the most tame forum I have visited on the internet. For the most part the users you people label as "Trolls" Are the most intelligent of this group, They know what they're talking about and it makes people who don't angry. Because when someone comes in spouting math/etc/facts, it makes other people feel stupid, and when people feel stupid they feel insulted/etc, and a cycle begins where it degrades into back and forth hate spewing.

So its as much the alleged "Trolls" fault as it is the player calling them a "troll". Its like adding fuel to a fire.

So saying "Oh boy this is going to get nasty blablah" is as bad or worse than any actual conversation beginning simply because its throwing fuel on the flame. You can blame a fire for consuming wood if you lay it right next to it.

[Raxiaz]

Your comment towards Katz was really uncalled for. I'm a mutual party in this and I don't care for either one of you two, but I can point out an immature comment when I see one. It was also "adding fuel to the fire" as you just so articulated yourself...

Do people even read what they post any more? :confused:

[Cream_Soda]

I gave katz my genuine feelings

[Karbuncle]

Your comment towards Katz was really uncalled for. I'm a mutual party in this and I don't care for either one of you two, but I can point out an immature comment when I see one. It was also "adding fuel to the fire" as you just so articulated yourself...

Do people even read what they post any more? :confused:

Once again you are being hypocritical. You say your words with the illusion of consideration then add a sarcastic insulting comment at the end which is very much fuel to the fire. You go to say how its stupid when people result to unnecessary comments, Then add little quips and insults to the end of your posts.

Which in itself is an uncalled comment. hence hypocrisy.

besides the first half of my post was more in general to all posters, Only the last like, 3 sentences was in regards to you.

That being said, I was only pointing out the fact he basically blocked Korpg for responding to him in quotes. I may be reading his post wrong but it sounded like "I asked you to stop quoting me and you didnt so im blocking you now".

So I, Jokingly, told him basically "Oh oh me next!". I was just pointing out the absurdity of blocking someone for quoting them. However, I do not know their backstory, So i could be interpreting this wrong. I read the forums often but i rarely read back-and-forth arguments spanning multiple pages to their fullest.

Either way, It felt like, from reading, He blocked someone from quoting him. Which i found an absurd act.

[Raxiaz]

You are interpreting it wrong.

And there is no such thing as "joking" on the Internet. You may as well go back to middle school mentality when posting on the Internet. Anything you think is "made in fun" and "just teasing" may as well be bullying on here.

[Karbuncle]

You are interpreting it wrong.

And there is no such thing as "joking" on the Internet. You may as well go back to middle school on the Internet. Anything you think is "made in fun" and "just teasing" may as well be bullying on here.

I interpreted it quite right if you ask me. You basically accused me of spouting nonsense I don't read, which in itself as an unnecessary/uncalled for comment just as much as anything i said. Simple hypocrisy.

And yes, Despite belief you can joke on the internet. rather its funny is subjective. Point being, I was pointing out the absurdity of blocking someone for using a forum function (Blocking) with the sarcasm of asking him to please block me next. I honestly did expect him to block me however, it does not change the fact it was sarcasm.

Joking/Sarcasm has always been a gray area for me when it comes to humor. If done right, i found sarcasm can be funny, even to the receiving end. however I found it works more when the two in question are friendly with eachother. Which means it may not have come across friendly to him.

I won't deny my intentions were to call him out on his absurd action. But as i said, I could be misunderstanding WHY Korpg was blocked. Which could easily be solved by katz himself.

Edit: And i wouldn't go as far to say sarcastically asking someone to block me in an attempt to point out the absurdity of blocking someone for responding using the Quote function is cyber-bullying.

Edit2: And my intent wasn't bullying in any way, Again, It was simply to point out the absurdity of blocking someone for using the quote function/replying. Which is what i interpreted his act as.

[Raxiaz]

You're still adding fuel to the fire so you ARE being a hypocrite, more so than me. You seem to have put more thought into your pennyarcade revelation than you did in your "joking" comment spawned from misinterpretation of events (i.e. naivety or ignorance). Your "joking" comment makes you look weak-minded and hypocritical to me.

At least when I say something I stand by it, rather than calling it a "joking statement."

Addendum: It doesn't matter if your joke wasn't meant to be interpreted as bullying. Tell that to the kids who were shot at some school because they bullied some kid and they thought it was "all in fun." Be careful what you say everywhere you are, internet or not, because it might just come back to bite you in the ass someday.

There's nothing stopping anyone from taking what you say the wrong way.

[Karbuncle]

And give me time to edit posts before responding, geez. I rarely get everything i need to say out on the first type through. My thought process involves much editing...

I find i never get my thoughts through clearly the first time around. I end up revising my statement several times before I'm happy with how its conveyed. Even remove whole paragraphs.

[Raxiaz]

I never called it "cyber-bullying", I was making a reference to an event (in real life) that may be "made in fun" for some but really "bullying" to another. On the Internet, we call this "trolling," or rather, what you were doing is called "trolling." You're inciting flames from another user by provoking them with your comment.

[Karbuncle]

You're still adding fuel to the fire so you ARE being a hypocrite, more so than me. You seem to have put more thought into your pennyarcade revelation than you did in your "joking" comment spawned from misinterpretation of events (i.e. naivety or ignorance). Your "joking" comment makes you look weak-minded and hypocritical to me.

At least when I say something I stand by it, rather than calling it a "joking statement."

Yes, But even if we're both hypocrites doesn't make you less of a Hypocrite is what I'm saying. You denied being hypocritical, that doesn't sound like standing by your statement to me.

I am standing by my statement, Just because you don't believe me does not mean I am not. I've been very clear on why i said what i said. I used Sarcasm to point out an absurd action. Sorry if its too complex for you to understand. Actually read what i said, Joke/sarcasm was a gray area, I admit i worded my first response wrong, "Sarcasm" was a better word than "Jokingly". I've corrected this.

And i've already accepted i am ignorant of the events taken place between Korpg and Katz, You pointing out something I've already said adds no more relevance to it.


I never called it "cyber-bullying", I was making a reference to an event (in real life) that may be "made in fun" for some but really "bullying" to another. On the Internet, we call this "trolling," or rather, what you were doing is called "trolling." You're inciting flames from another user by provoking them with your comment.

I deny it as trolling. My post was not an attempt to piss people off by purposefully saying something that would enact the most negative responses. That is trolling. My intent was never to "Incite" Flames. Simply to point out it was absurd to block someone for quoting them.

If i was trolling, your comment on asking me if i even read my posts is trolling as well. Fair is fair, by your logic anyway, that was a Trolling comment, Because to me i saw no other reason to say it but to insult me.

[Raxiaz]

Where did I say I denied being hypocritical? Point that part out to me, please.

And pointing out that you were ignorant of it doesn't change the fact that you are ignorant of it and shouldn't have made a comment on something that you know little to nothing about, just your own experiences with both users. It would have avoided this whole debate.

The way you worded it is clearly provoking the user and you are thus "trolling." It doesn't matter how you view it on the Internet, it matters how others view it.

[Kensagaku]

Honestly Katz, I do feel you're overreacting. A person commenting on what they're getting from your comment (i.e. "This is what I understand you to be saying") isn't necessarily a manipulation; they could simply be stating what their view on your words is. If you're being unclear and/or vague, misunderstandings happen. I won't say that people don't manipulate quotes and such at times, but honestly Korpg was simply replying to you and you're essentially sticking your fingers in your ears and going "LALALALALA LAST WORD". I don't mean this offensively and I apologize if it comes off as such, but it's a bit of a childish behavior. Especially with the post you blocked Korpg for; he had valid points. Not having English as a first language makes it hard for English people to understand you at times, for one thing, and I know sometimes your posts give me trouble once in a while, though I can generally get the gist of them pretty quickly.

That being said... Rax, Karb's got a point. People are so thin-skinned here that the slightest sarcasm and/or joking is treated as "OMG, YOU'RE BULLYING ME AND YOU'RE A TROLL." It's a social nuance, knowing that people aren't always 100% serious when they say things. More often than not, these jokes aren't meant to be derogatory or hurtful, but are sometimes the best way to point out a problem or absurdity like Karby did. It's no different than when we say "I'm sorry, but you're being absurd by blocking <insert person> for <insert silly offense here>." People will still be just as thin-skinned and still call down flames and trolls. Threads will derail, and the "victim" is just as guilty because they can't learn to take a damn joke. Plus jokes are the best way for us to express our feelings on a matter, but in a less aggressive way. At least in my case it is. ^^;

Either way, you're both fighting over a pretty dumb point. Yer both being hypocritical at points, but what human isn't? No one's perfect. Just let it go already, geez. ~_~

[Karbuncle]

Where did I say I denied being hypocritical? Point that part out to me, please.

Teehee! I was hoping you'd ask that


You are interpreting it wrong.

Right here ^^! I read this as you Implying my assumption on your hypocrisy was wrong. IF you did not deny being hypocritical I fail to see why you would tell me that interpreting your post as "Flame bait", hence "uncalled for" was "Interpreting it wrong", Implying it was not Flame Bait/Uncalled For, hence you werent being hypocritical.

Am i reading too far into it? I bet its the excuse I'll get. But i dont think i am.



And pointing out that you were ignorant of it doesn't change the fact that you are ignorant of it and shouldn't have made a comment on something that you know little to nothing about, just your own experiences with both users. It would have avoided this whole debate.

I'm sorry? I commented on the facts i had at hand. 1) Korpg psots, 2) Katz Blocks him for quoting/responding to him. I'm filled in enough on what i saw to type what i did. While i am ignorant to the preamble to this, It does not change the fact that from the facts i had at my disposal, It looked for all intents and purposes Katz blocked Korpg for Quoting/Responding to him. An Absurd act in my eyes.



The way you worded it is clearly provoking the user and you are thus "trolling." It doesn't matter how you view it on the Internet, it matters how others view it.

I call bubcus, See this is the exact reason why users should not be able to lock threads. I had no intentions on "flamming" him or "Trolling" him. My intention was to point out the absurdity of blocking someone for responding to them.

Do my methods leave room for improvement? Yah, I don't deny this one bit. Looking back i honestly believe i could have acted better. However, Even if i went back and changed it my actions have already happened and what i did can not be taken back. So no matter how much i want to go back and change it, I can't. I'm stuck with the choices i made. Its a sad truth, no amount of regret will change it.

So no, My intents weren't trolling in any way, Only to maybe point out to him that his actions were absurd/extreme and he shouldn't block someone for responding to him.

Edit: In Honor of Kens post, I will end the argument here. Rax get your last post it and I promise I won't respond on this anymore. I admitted to my wrongs, and he's right. We're talking in circles. I know what i did wrong and i could have gone about it differently, But i honestly feel nothing would have changed.

I'd be called a troll no matter how i said it, because again, People don't understand the difference between trolling, and disagreeing, or pointing out absurd actions. To them its all the same.

[Raxiaz]

No, I will not stand by and watch as one of the human race's downfalls is clearly abused. The inability to actually understand what another person is meaning is the exact reason for many conflicts. It's also why society can't advance as fast as it should. People don't take time to understand ****, they just read/hear what is stated and interpret it for themselves. They don't know what the **** the other person really means. They just THINK they do. If they're right, awesome, if wrong, what happens then? Nothing? Nothing is hardly ever what happens in a misunderstanding.

Misunderstandings lead to stupid bull**** like this. They also lead to fights, wars, and death. Saying they don't is ignorant. Yes, I'm standing by that statement.

This game alone even has it stated that the inability to communicate freely without misunderstanding is one of many civilizations' downfalls...

[Raxiaz]

Teehee! I was hoping you'd ask that



Right here ^^! I read this as you Implying my assumption on your hypocrisy was wrong. IF you did not deny being hypocritical I fail to see why you would tell me that interpreting your post as "Flame bait", hence "uncalled for" was "Interpreting it wrong", Implying it was not Flame Bait/Uncalled For, hence you werent being hypocritical.

Am i reading too far into it? I bet its the excuse I'll get. But i dont think i am.



I'm sorry? I commented on the facts i had at hand. 1) Korpg psots, 2) Katz Blocks him for quoting/responding to him. I'm filled in enough on what i saw to type what i did. While i am ignorant to the preamble to this, It does not change the fact that from the facts i had at my disposal, It looked for all intents and purposes Katz blocked Korpg for Quoting/Responding to him. An Absurd act in my eyes.




I call bubcus, See this is the exact reason why users should not be able to lock threads. I had no intentions on "flamming" him or "Trolling" him. My intention was to point out the absurdity of blocking someone for responding to them.

Do my methods leave room for improvement? Yah, I don't deny this one bit. Looking back i honestly believe i could have acted better. However, Even if i went back and changed it my actions have already happened and what i did can not be taken back. So no matter how much i want to go back and change it, I can't. I'm stuck with the choices i made. Its a sad truth, no amount of regret will change it.

So no, My intents weren't trolling in any way, Only to maybe point out to him that his actions were absurd/extreme and he shouldn't block someone for responding to him.

Edit: In Honor of Kens post, I will end the argument here. Rax get your last post it and I promise I won't respond on this anymore. I admitted to my wrongs, and he's right. We're talking in circles. I know what i did wrong and i could have gone about it differently, But i honestly feel nothing would have changed.

I'd be called a troll no matter how i said it, because again, People don't understand the difference between trolling, and disagreeing, or pointing out absurd actions. To them its all the same.

LIKE'd. Yeah, I LIKE'd a post going against me.

"You are interpreting it wrong." was a statement on your interpretations of Korpg's/Kat's relation to each other. I did not intend for that to be a statement on your interpretations of my posts.

[Rhianu]

To close your own thread because you don't get the feedback/support you expected from other forum members, is a cowardly thing to do. I can't think of any other FFXI forum that I frequent, that give forum members access to this. Deleting posts, yes - but not closing threads.

GameFAQs allows users to close their own topics if no one has posted in them for a certain amount of time.

[Karbuncle]

GameFAQs allows users to close their own topics if no one has posted in them for a certain amount of time.

That wouldn't be a bad way to change it if you ask me.

It would leave people to talk if they were so doing, and if it got too bad GMs would lock it, But it gives the OP the power to close a thread that for all intents and purposes is dead.

Its a sensible way to handle it. I like it.

[Raksha]

GameFAQs allows users to close their own topics if no one has posted in them for a certain amount of time.

Yeah that sounds like a good idea.

[Kensagaku]

No, I will not stand by and watch as one of the human race's downfalls is clearly abused. The inability to actually understand what another person is meaning is the exact reason for many conflicts. It's also why society can't advance as fast as it should. People don't take time to understand ****, they just read/hear what is stated and interpret it for themselves. They don't know what the **** the other person really means. They just THINK they do. If they're right, awesome, if wrong, what happens then? Nothing? Nothing is hardly ever what happens in a misunderstanding.

Misunderstandings lead to stupid bull**** like this. They also lead to fights, wars, and death. Saying they don't is ignorant. Yes, I'm standing by that statement.

This game alone even has it stated that the inability to communicate freely without misunderstanding is one of many civilizations' downfalls...

You're really taking an extremist view on this. We're not going to start wars or kill each other over a misunderstanding on a game. The worst that's going to happen here is someone is going to get butthurt and block another user or close their thread because they don't like people disagreeing. If someone's so thin-skinned that they're going to hurt themselves or something more over this or a little internet reputation, they're not going to survive in general society. People aren't always sugarcoating their words and more often than not will speak their minds in the most blunt manner, i.e. either using sarcasm to denote that they disagree/disapprove or simply flat out saying "no, you're wrong."

You're no saint yourself, few are and I know I'm sure as hell not, yet you're talking about the crusade to "not watch as one of the human race's downfalls is clearly abused". What downfall? The fact that we misunderstand? It's not necessarily that someone is purposely misinterpreting, but that we make assumptions based on the information we're given and go from there. If we do not know the whole story, it is because we were not present to learn of it. We can only use the information we have, and from the information provided, Katz did seem to be blocking him for a silly reason. I know a good deal of the backstory after watching them argue and I still think it's a dumb reason.

Still, you're looking far too deeply into what's simply a game forum. If this was a political event then yes, it could have extreme consequences. But here? No, not really. It feels like you're just preaching and honestly, it makes you come off with an unlikeable (to me, maybe not to others.) "Holier than thou" attitude. You're just as guilty of making misinterpretations, and just leaping down throats because someone else misunderstands due to a lack of information is hypocrisy, just as you said.

And ugh. Last word, can't back down from an argument, etc. Yay being a hypocrite myself about ending the argument bit. :s



GameFAQs allows users to close their own topics if no one has posted in them for a certain amount of time.

I like this idea. Mods still have the main control over threads but if something's dying people can close it so we don't have huge necrobumps out of the blue.

[Tamoa]

GameFAQs allows users to close their own topics if no one has posted in them for a certain amount of time.

That is not a forum I frequent - in fact, I have never been to that forum.

Also, that's a different thing altogether. If members of this forum were allowed to close their own thread if noone's posted in it for say, 2 weeks, or however long, I wouldn't mind. As it is now though, we can start a topic, close it at will, reopen at will, and even override forum mod locks. Which is utterly ridiculous.



That being said... Rax, Karb's got a point. People are so thin-skinned here that the slightest sarcasm and/or joking is treated as "OMG, YOU'RE BULLYING ME AND YOU'RE A TROLL." It's a social nuance, knowing that people aren't always 100% serious when they say things. More often than not, these jokes aren't meant to be derogatory or hurtful, but are sometimes the best way to point out a problem or absurdity like Karby did. It's no different than when we say "I'm sorry, but you're being absurd by blocking <insert person> for <insert silly offense here>." People will still be just as thin-skinned and still call down flames and trolls. Threads will derail, and the "victim" is just as guilty because they can't learn to take a damn joke. Plus jokes are the best way for us to express our feelings on a matter, but in a less aggressive way. At least in my case it is. ^^;


This, very much this. I do believe I have said it before, if you can't handle people disagreeing with you, or pointing out a flaw in your argument, even saying outright they think whatever idea/opinion you posted is dumb, you really shouldn't be posting on this or any other discussion forum at all.

As for those whose 1st language isn't English - well, I'm one of those people. I try to make a point of using correct English, and wording myself as carefully as I can. I can't say I have seen anyone being ridiculed here for bad English if it's obvious they are from a non-English speaking country.

[Raxiaz]

It's not a "holier than thou" attitude it's a blunt statement. Misunderstandings start crap all the time. I'm not saying we're going to start wars on an internet gaming forum, but if we're not stopping to think about what someone says on a freakin' message board, how the hell do you expect us to stop and think about what someone says or does in the real world?

Completely missed the point, I see...

[Kensagaku]

It's not a "holier than thou" attitude it's a blunt statement. Misunderstandings start crap all the time. I'm not saying we're going to start wars on an internet gaming forum, but if we're not stopping to think about what someone says on a freakin' message board, how the hell do you expect us to stop and think about what someone says or does in the real world?

Completely missed the point, I see...

And there's another snide remark that's really not helping and only adding fuel to the fire. You shouldn't cry troll if you're going to perform the same behaviors you don't agree with

That aside, I didn't miss the point. Karby pointed it out in an earlier post, with the bit about internet anonymity. People act different IRL when they can't hide behind a screenname and a wall of text. Me, I tend to be very quiet IRL, and usually I'm not very argumentative unless I'm passionate about a subject. I'm not always the most outgoing, either. Online, I'm a lot more free to just be myself without the restrictions of IRL's social structure. I'm talkative, outgoing, I have no problem voicing my arguments when I feel that something's wrong, and I more often than not can joke around because people will understand I'm joking.

It's a message board, and you take it far too seriously. IRL there are many more social restrictions, and as a result there's a large portion of the internet population that tends to be more laid-back and polite. That doesn't mean misunderstandings don't happen and people won't cause fights over stupid things, but that's because no one's perfect. You can "think about peoples' words" all you want, but unless you know all of the information because you are directly involved or you've been stalking one or both parties to the situation, misunderstandings are going to happen. You can stop and think all you want, but there's no guarantee that you'll be right on the situation 100% of the time. It's how logic works; you use information given, and draw a conclusion.

[Tamoa]

It's not a "holier than thou" attitude it's a blunt statement. Misunderstandings start crap all the time. I'm not saying we're going to start wars on an internet gaming forum, but if we're not stopping to think about what someone says on a freakin' message board, how the hell do you expect us to stop and think about what someone says or does in the real world?

Completely missed the point, I see...

I'm not going to get into an argument with you. I will just point out this:

You are most certainly adding your share to any arguing/flaming/trolling going on in this tread, moreso than many others.

[Melodicya]

Hello Everyone!

This thread has strayed a bit from the original topic, which was to discuss the ability for members of the forum to close their own threads. Please try to stay to this topic, or we may have to close this thread.

If you would like, you can always review the forum guidelines at the link below:

FINAL FANTASY XI FORUM Guidelines
http://support.na.square-enix.com/rule.php?id=20&la=1

Thank you for your understanding!

[Azagthoth]

It's not a "holier than thou" attitude it's a blunt statement. Misunderstandings start crap all the time. I'm not saying we're going to start wars on an internet gaming forum, but if we're not stopping to think about what someone says on a freakin' message board, how the hell do you expect us to stop and think about what someone says or does in the real world?

Completely missed the point, I see...

An internet forum shouldn't have any impact on a person regardless of what is said; there isn't any logical or rational reason to get upset about anything I've seen posted on this forum thus far. As long as nobody is posting personal and/or explicit information about another persoan there shouldn't be any issues.

[Korpg]

I have respectfully asked you not to make comments about my comments. You have forced me to take further action.

"This message is hidden because Korpg is on your ignore list. "

You put me on your ignore list because I disagree with you?

What would happen if somebody else disagrees with you? You block them too? You might have a lot of people on your ignore list pretty soon then.

Not that I care anyway, your ideas are generally stupid.

[Raxiaz]

GM please just close this topic and let it be over with.

And god forbid any argument or debate stray from the original pattern of thinking. God forbid we try to actually understand each other's positions. Instead, we call "hypocrite" and get on with our lives.

[Karbuncle]

Understanding can only be achieved when both parties can look at it in a calm manner. Its anger that is the route of problems.

I feel this topic could continue in a positive manner still. The Thread as a Whole, not the recent conversation. Especially in the department of brainstorming possible solutions to the matter. Similar to how it was brought up you could only lock a thread after its been innactive for a certain period of time.

[Korpg]

Wow, I go play with my niece and nephew for a few hours and this happens.

What katz's problem is that I interpreted his idea into simpler terms and he thinks I was twisting his words around, even though I asked for him to restate his intentions and he said exactly what I said.

When I interpreted his idea into simpler terms, I gave my own opinion in the matter, which was opposite from his. He got all offensive and started saying that I was slandering him, which anyone can see I wasn't. I decided to give him a taste of his own medicine and started pointing out all the same slanderous remarks he made to everyone, which then he started deleting every one of his posts to try to say he never said any of it. Lucky that some of his "slanderous" remarks were quoted and saved from the purge of deletions.

We then agreed to stop talking to each other, and the absolute next post he made he broke that agreement. So I pointed it out and I got hit with the "slander" line over again.

That is basically it in a nutshell.

[katz]

I agree please close this topic. The majority of view points have been made. Certain people wish to antagonize other people for what ever reason and its not on topic.

[Raxiaz]

There is absolutely nothing more than can come from this topic other than "YOU'RE WRONG I'M RIGHT RAWRRR."

All possible, logical solutions to the problem have been presented. Nothing more for the Devs to read other than e-peen growth.

Please lock this topic. PLEASE.

[Korpg]

Understanding can only be achieved when both parties can look at it in a calm manner. Its anger that is the route of problems.

I feel this topic could continue in a positive manner still. The Thread as a Whole, not the recent conversation. Especially in the department of brainstorming possible solutions to the matter. Similar to how it was brought up you could only lock a thread after its been innactive for a certain period of time.

Well, I still think that the original poster should not have the ability to delete their own thread. Or delete their whole posts (but take that ability away and you will have nothing but "edits" with blanks in them).

Also, it helps to see what you write and edit yourself before hitting "reply," maybe that will help with these "deletes" and "misunderstandings."

[Korpg]

Plus, it doesn't help that the ones who are creating the most problems are the ones who are screaming the loudest.

[Karbuncle]

There is absolutely nothing more than can come from this topic other than "YOU'RE WRONG I'M RIGHT RAWRRR."

All possible, logical solutions to the problem have been presented. Nothing more for the Devs to read other than e-peen growth.

Please lock this topic. PLEASE.

I respectfully disagree.

Ideas such as solutions that could make both parties happy might come up. For instance a page back it was brought up that OPs maintain the power to close a thread, But only afters its been inactive for some time.

Right now the Reasons why/why not are truly played out, However now that that's out of the way i feel Solutions to the problem that can try to satisfy both parties could come to fruition. I know the REP said he was looking into it, So maybe if we give them some ideas that help both parties involved, It might make a happier solution in the long run.

Edit: I clarify, I mean maintain the ability to Lock a thread, The Ability to Delete a thread (If we have it) is simply something that should not be possible. I don't think we have that power though do we?


Plus, it doesn't help that the ones who are creating the most problems are the ones who are screaming the loudest.

I understand that, But two rights don't make a wrong. If we can show the GM we can discuss this calmly, it may remain unlocked, as it should.

As the "Problem" portion is talked out, The Solution portion should be discussed.

[Tamoa]

I do believe most of us have read threads on here that we think should be locked. It's all a matter of opinion. But should be up to forum mods to decide. Spamming a thread with "this is pointless and should be locked" is - well, it's pointless.

As for the idea of letting topic creators lock their thread after a set time of inactivity, that is definitely not a bad idea and will - like Ken pointed out - prevent necrobumping. If someone does come across a locked thread they haven't read before, and have something they would like to ask/add/suggest, they can always make a new thread referring to the locked one.

[Korpg]

I do believe most of us have read threads on here that we think should be locked. It's all a matter of opinion. But should be up to forum mods to decide. Spamming a thread with "this is pointless and should be locked" is - well, it's pointless.

It is also pointless to spam "close this thread now" when the person spamming that is the one(s) who are losing their case.

[Kensagaku]

I'm starting to wonder if that's a potential consequence of removing the ability to freely close one's own thread. Will we just get spammed "CLOSE THIS THREAD NOW" posts that will lead to threads getting closed by GMs simply because it's spam? Or will they simply delete the spammed posts and let us move on? That's something that suddenly concerns me. :s

That aside, I've seen the power to delete one's own posts in the past, but certainly not the ability to lock/delete a thread, especially through a modlock. It's an easily abused power that needs to be removed.

[katz]

[QUOTE=Tamoa;137636] should be up to forum mods to decide. Spamming a thread with "this is pointless and should be locked" is - well, it's pointless.

As we currently do not have a mechanism for contacting the Mods to close a thread it was a response back to the moderator and not spam.

[Alienmonkey]

If it gets closed OP can reopen it. If not someone can remake, probably me.

[katz]

I see a solution. Keep the rights of the operator to open or close their topics but give the Mod the power to reopen it if he feels the topic has not yet been concluded and other people wish to contribute. If they feel it is going down the troll or flame core route then they can close it.

[Korpg]

I see a solution. Keep the rights of the operator to open or close their topics but give the Mod the power to reopen it if he feels the topic has not yet been con concluded and other people wish to contribute. If they feel it is going down the troll or flame core route then they can close it.

Isn't that subjective? How would the moderator know if the topic is worthy enough to be reopened, if the question has been answered in the opinion of the original poster?

Besides, I think we are all wanting the power for the moderators to close threads exclusively, not inclusively. That is what we are striving for.

[Cream_Soda]

There is absolutely nothing more than can come from this topic other than "YOU'RE WRONG I'M RIGHT RAWRRR."

All possible, logical solutions to the problem have been presented. Nothing more for the Devs to read other than e-peen growth.

Please lock this topic. PLEASE.
Why do you care so much? I see you in nearly every topic begging for it to be locked.

[Darkwizardzin]

.........Personaly I do not think the OP should have the right to close there own threads.

As people have already proven all these posters have closed threads just because they don't like where they have gone... and all that it does is move the thread to somewhere else. (the thread doesn't die... just annoys people alittle and makes them move somewhere else)

When a discussion has been started it is up for the moderators to deside if it needs to be stoped. If the OP doesn't like where is goes they can just leave it and start over. There isn't a limit to how many threads you can make (to my knowledge) so that's no problem. Like many have said already.... there is little benafit to keeping this option but it causes alot of problems.

As for the people who think this thread should be closed... chill out you already stated your point no need to spam it. let the moderators do there jobs. (for the record I think this thread should stay open because more opinions/ideas can be born from it for the admins to use when desiding what to do with this feature)

[katz]

Do you not think an operator choosing to close their thread is allowing them to chill down a topic that has become over heated and twisted from their original intentions.?
When some members deliberately take your context and twist it to mean the total opposite of your opinion and try to convince everyone it was your opinion, how should this be dealt with?
How do you deal with someone who constantly changes your topics on every topic you post?
How do you deal with unintentional TOS rule breaking if you cant edit or delete or close?
Personally I have deleted any post that I discovered may have been deemed to have broken TOS, I have asked the person who was changing my views and convincing other thats what I said, to stop it on more than 1 occasion. I have closed derailing threads. I have asked them not to comment on any of my posts so that they would not change my point of view and I have asked them not to refer to me in any of his comments. In the end the only way I could stop him was not to see any of his comments and let him change my point of view to others so now people believe thats what I said. He is now on my ignore list and the solution seemed to be let him make up lies about me, which to be honest is not a very satisfactory solution. How would you have dealt with someone who blatently twisted your threads to make you a liar to others. Wait for a Mod to remove them, so that everyone could see the lies he was telling? I think no one likes to be called a liar over and over again. This was why the first thread was closed by myself. How else do you think this could be managed better in the future whats the solution?

[Pharaun]

Korpg wasn't calling you a liar, he taking the statements you posted and logically applying them, you didn't like someone calling you out on your nonsense so you closed the thread. You've been backpedaling so fast about that thread that I'm surprised you haven't broken the sound barrier yet.

[katz]

When someone keeps telling you ,you believe in something that you dont believe in, and then saying its what you said despite you trying to clarify on more than one occassion your point of view and then they still insist its your point of view, its being called a liar. If it was a mistake of understanding then he could have said apologies I mistook what you meant but he continued to change what I had said saying it was what I believed in. I never back tracked on my own personal view I never made it personal, quoting on quotes to make them sound like he believed i was saying something else. When I said not to comment on posts that he didnt understand and that we both spoke a different language he continued . So what was the solution

[Ravenmore]

Deleteing your post so people can't go and see if you are telling the truth or not makes only you look bad even if your telling the truth to why you deleted it, same if true for edits that come long after the time the post was first posted.

[Korpg]

Do you not think an operator choosing to close their thread is allowing them to chill down a topic that has become over heated and twisted from their original intentions.?

If you meant to first thread you closed because you didn't like the outcome, so you closed it, then that isn't twisting it from it's original intention.

You had a bad idea, people told you that it was a bad idea, you closed the thread claiming that they are all against you. Later, you deleted your thread when the evidence started to come against you. That is not twisting your words, because that is what you did.


When some members deliberately take your context and twist it to mean the total opposite of your opinion and try to convince everyone it was your opinion, how should this be dealt with?

You had an idea that wasn't understood that well, so people (more than one) have told you what they got out of it. Yet, everyone agreed that the translated version was as close to the original as anyone could understand. You even understood the conversion and picked on one thing that you claimed you didn't say, but even the original version had what you said.

Its like this. I say the object in front of you is a stallion, you claim it is a horse. They are both the same thing! I am right, you are right, but you are getting offended because I called that object in front of you a stallion and say I'm twisting your words and I'm "slandering" you.



How do you deal with someone who constantly changes your topics on every topic you post?

You continue to say that! Nobody is "constantly changing" anything you say! We don't need to (until you delete your posts again) because it is exactly the same thing you said!



How do you deal with unintentional TOS rule breaking if you cant edit or delete or close?
Not saying it? Post reading yourself? Actually looking at your post and seeing if you mean what you say? You could try that instead of bashing the keyboard and hope words come out.



Personally I have deleted any post that I discovered may have been deemed to have broken TOS, I have asked the person who was changing my views and convincing other thats what I said, to stop it on more than 1 occasion.
You deleted your first 63 posts! ALL OF THEM! Did you really break the ToS 63 times...in a row? No!

Also, you asked me to stop quoting you. But you said it as such: Stop talking to me, and I'll stop talking to you. I did, but within minutes you went back to quote me and reply. When I called you out on that, you said that I, and I alone, was supposed to stop talking to you. That it is ok for you to talk to me because you deemed it to be "fair."


I have closed derailing threads.
That thread was on topic the entire time. You didn't like the answers, so you closed (and deleted) it.

I have asked them not to comment on any of my posts so that they would not change my point of view and I have asked them not to refer to me in any of his comments.[quote]
Half-true. You said for me to stop talking to you and for you to do the same. Which you didn't.
[quote]In the end the only way I could stop him was not to see any of his comments and let him change my point of view to others so now people believe thats what I said.

If I really was changing your point of view, would that really work? No. Instead, you are ignoring the main problem, which is you!


He is now on my ignore list and the solution seemed to be let him make up lies about me, which to be honest is not a very satisfactory solution.

How can anything I say be lies if there is proof backing me up, but most anything you said was deleted...by you...so you can save face and think that you never said any of the things you said?


How would you have dealt with someone who blatently twisted your threads to make you a liar to others.
A) If I really was twisting words around, wouldn't I be doing it to more than one person? Seems to me that the only person who is claiming that I have twisted anything is you.
B) Only person twisting any words is you, doing it to yourself, saying that you said one thing then later on saying that you never said that, you said something else (which is backpetaling, I wasn't the one who called you out on that either).



Wait for a Mod to remove them, so that everyone could see the lies he was telling? I think no one likes to be called a liar over and over again. This was why the first thread was closed by myself. How else do you think this could be managed better in the future whats the solution?

Wait, you want a mod to remove you? You are the only person here who is contradicting themselves (besides Dallas, but he has seemed to disappear).

Oh, and somebody quote me. In full. Please

[Darkwizardzin]

...Korpg why should someone quote you just so you can by pass the fact he is ignoring you? I think you and katz should stop talking to and about each other from this point onward. Only thing continuing this would do is create unneeded drama to the threads... and I for one would not welcome that.

before you say it korpg or katz... im not saying you both on your own create drama... but when it comes to each other... you do.. so just stop.

[Darkwizardzin]

meh, fine.

Good... now maybe this thread can get back on topic.

[Raksha]

So how long should a thread go un-replied-in before the OP gets the option to delete it? 1 day? 1 week?

[Korpg]

Probably 2 weeks.

[Bagel]

There is no need for the OP to delete. If no one responds, it ends up getting pushed further back by more pressing topics. Let the mods do their job and handle the mess of deleting topics.

[Ravenmore]

If no has repiled to it leave it open maybe someone will bump it and get it going again.

[Leonlionheart]

If no has repiled to it leave it open maybe someone will bump it and get it going again.

This.

Why do old threads need to disappear? Maybe they have information in them that needs to be accessed at some point or is later proven false and needs correcting? Deleting them is just silly.

On the main topic, I agree. Locking your own threads is INCREDIBLY annoying.

People end up chalking all comments that are not agreeing with them to "TROLOLOLO" "GONNA LOCK CAUZE I THINK I"M RIGHT BUT NOT REALLY CUZ PPL HAVE SHOWN SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AGAINST MY REALLY IDIOTIC IDEA BUT THEY TROLLOLOLOLS SO I GON LOCK UM UP." If people don't see that as a problem, I have no faith in these forums.

[katz]

People believe I dont accept other peoples views that are valid arguements against my opinion. This is not the case. I am all for pro and con views. What has been challenging to me is the personalization of comments. If people start a "you said battle" I believe I have the right to say no you misunderstood what I said. The pro of closing threads that have become personal attacks, the heated battles dont take place, the con, other people cant add to the topic. Solution people to stop using the you said this and you said that but instead to apply how they feel to the topic that doesnt use anyone else as an example. Quote should be used for clarification purpose only. If everyone respected this there would be far fewer closed threads

[Leonlionheart]

People believe I dont accept other peoples views that are valid arguements against my opinion. This is not the case. I am all for pro and con views. What has been challenging to me is the personalization of comments. If people start a "you said battle" I believe I have the right to say no you misunderstood what I said. The pro of closing threads that have become personal attacks, the heated battles dont take place, the con, other people cant add to the topic. Solution people to stop using the you said this and you said that but instead to apply how they feel to the topic that doesnt use anyone else as an example. Quote should be used for clarification purpose only. If everyone respected this there would be far fewer closed threads

No, no, no, no, no.

First off, admins almost always close down "heated battles" and personal attacks before they get really juicy (bummer, I know). You have them to rely on if it gets too messy.

If you open a thread you open it for the entire internet to see and you should be responsible enough in creating threads that you can handle anyone. I agree that the twisting of words is unfortunate and really underhanded and cowardly. Rather than trying to understand what someone says, people pick and pick and pick and the irrelevant points just to get under your skin. However, you should either just ignore said comments or try to clarify what you meant, not close down the ENTIRE discussion because your feelings are getting hurt.

[Jar]

need to fix the trend of people reopening others closed threads

[Leonlionheart]

need to fix the trend of people reopening others closed threads

It makes sense; the OP gets the last word in without a reply- again chalking it up to TROLOLOL. A lesser man would re open a thread just to show that the OPOP was wrong, and not let them have control over closing it.

[Jar]

It makes sense; the OP gets the last word in without a reply- again chalking it up to TROLOLOL. A lesser man would re open a thread just to show that the OPOP was wrong, and not let them have control over closing it.

i wasnt wrong and reopener didnt even really reply just opened up to flame

[Leonlionheart]

i wasnt wrong and reopener didnt even really reply just opened up to flame

Edit: NVM I found it.

You were incredibly wrong in my opinion, and that's why you closed the thread.

You just shut off discussion, your thread is the shining example of "ouch my feelings hurt bye guys i'm signing off instead of arguing my case." Note that that's just the general feel I have from the reason most threads are closed.

I'll post my opinion on the matter over there.

[katz]

Personally I think anyone who quotes the word coward in any of their debates are inviting flames. Please refrain from insulting your fellow users with such words.

[Leonlionheart]

Personally I think anyone who quotes the word coward in any of their debates are inviting flames. Please refrain from insulting your fellow users with such words.

I'll rephrase, although I think it's appropriate. Deleting threads seems to be a defense mechanism when you're beloved idea is going the wrong way.

[Jar]

Edit: NVM I found it.

You were incredibly wrong in my opinion, and that's why you closed the thread.

You just shut off discussion, your thread is the shining example of "ouch my feelings hurt bye guys i'm signing off instead of arguing my case." Note that that's just the general feel I have from the reason most threads are closed.

I'll post my opinion on the matter over there.

i argued my case for a few pages and saw nothing new being added and closed. untill you went and actually gave input to the reopened one it was all the same ol' butt hurt WArs saying dont gimp this w/o reading anything.

[Leonlionheart]

That's what I mean about closing your own threads. When posting on these forums you have to sift through the many bad posts till you can actually get on board with something good.

I don't think threads should be closed rather than more closely moderated.

[Jar]

That's what I mean about closing your own threads. When posting on these forums you have to sift through the many bad posts till you can actually get on board with something good.

I don't think threads should be closed rather than more closely moderated.

mehh i just got bored with it wasnt planing on getting it fixed anyway just wanted to show a few ppl how stupid abyssea is and i dont even think i did that because no one even cared how crits in this game work and how stupid it was to give that much crit damage and crit rate to everyone when only a few jobs make ample use of it

[JackDaniels]

That's what I mean about closing your own threads. When posting on these forums you have to sift through the many bad posts till you can actually get on board with something good.

I don't think threads should be closed rather than more closely moderated.

LOLOLOL that's never going to happen.

[Ravenmore]

mehh i just got bored with it wasnt planing on getting it fixed anyway just wanted to show a few ppl how stupid abyssea is and i dont even think i did that because no one even cared how crits in this game work and how stupid it was to give that much crit damage and crit rate to everyone when only a few jobs make ample use of it

Closing the thread with out making that last post I wouldn't have reopened it, but making a smart comment then closing it invites people to want to reply. So you did the same thing as the trolls you were trying to cut off.

[Jar]

Closing the thread with out making that last post I wouldn't have reopened it, but making a smart comment then closing it invites people to want to reply. So you did the same thing as the trolls you were trying to cut off.
SO THERE WHERE TORLLS I KNEWS IT MY TROLLS SENSES

[Ravenmore]

SO THERE WHERE TORLLS I KNEWS IT MY TROLLS SENSES

You said there were and it was your thread right.

[Ravenmore]

[NA]Forum Features Updated (Jul. 6)
The following adjustments and additions have been made to the forum along with the maintenance performed on Jul. 5th.
•Threads can no longer be closed.


welp thats the end of that.

[Alhanelem]

The right decision.

[Tamoa]

[NA]Forum Features Updated (Jul. 6)
The following adjustments and additions have been made to the forum along with the maintenance performed on Jul. 5th.
•Threads can no longer be closed.

Well hmm. The option to close thread is still there for me.

[Ravenmore]

Maybe threads from before this change are not affected.

Edit: just checked a thread I made and no option to close it

[Tamoa]

That's odd. I'm going to try to close this, then reopen it again of course. If it turns out I can't reopen it, then I apologize.

[Tamoa]

Well, I was able to close this thread, and reopen it. The option to delete the whole thread is there too. Really odd.

[Ravenmore]

Well, I was able to close this thread, and reopen it. The option to delete the whole thread is there too. Really odd.

Bug report go. Weird though.

[Jackastheripper]

[NA]Forum Features Updated (Jul. 6)
The following adjustments and additions have been made to the forum along with the maintenance performed on Jul. 5th.
•Threads can no longer be closed.

Why? It was the one power we had against the trolls and flamers from taking over our own threads. We just let the few who abuse this take it away from all of us.... IMO, it's a step back.

[Ravenmore]

It was always a bad idea and did nothing if people ended the thread with a smart comment. If people wanted to keep it going they could just open another thread and start right from were it left off.

[SNK]

[NA]Forum Features Updated (Jul. 6)
The following adjustments and additions have been made to the forum along with the maintenance performed on Jul. 5th.
•Threads can no longer be closed.

Why? It was the one power we had against the trolls and flamers from taking over our own threads. We just let the few who abuse this take it away from all of us.... IMO, it's a step back.

No it's a step foward.

[Korpg]

That is good to know.

[Korpg]

Why? It was the one power we had against the trolls and flamers from taking over our own threads. We just let the few who abuse this take it away from all of us.... IMO, it's a step back.

You can blame Alienmonkey and Bumbeen for taking that away from us, which is ok by me.

If it wasn't for them abusing that option, we would probably still have the option to close threads. So thank you you two.

[Kensagaku]

I agree that it's a step in the right direction. No more debates being closed because someone doesn't like a little disagreement; instead, this is more where it should be, with moderators actually required to moderate the threads. If something goes wrong, or there's a troll, just report the post as offensive and it'll be dealt with. If someone disagrees with you, get over it. You have your opinion, they have theirs. A discussion board is just for that: a discussion.

Will be nice to actually be able to get more information or ideas from some of these threads.

[katz]

Now we just got useless threads open like this one. Topic Remove Close threads Action Ability removed Result Useless thread open.

[Korpg]

How is this useless?

[Tamoa]

Now we just got useless threads open like this one. Topic Remove Close threads Action Ability removed Result Useless thread open.

Well... you know, if you don't bump "useless threads like this one", they will get pushed back off of the first page and then further and further back. Take a look at the General Discussion section of the forum. There are PLENTY of useless threads that's been posted, most of them a lot worse than this one.

[Korpg]

I agree that it's a step in the right direction. No more debates being closed because someone doesn't like a little disagreement; instead, this is more where it should be, with moderators actually required to moderate the threads. If something goes wrong, or there's a troll, just report the post as offensive and it'll be dealt with. If someone disagrees with you, get over it. You have your opinion, they have theirs. A discussion board is just for that: a discussion.

Will be nice to actually be able to get more information or ideas from some of these threads.

Except mods still don't moderate. When people abuse the report button enough, people get banned for stupid things like "I disagree with you, and here is a list of reasons why without any discrimination or slander towards your name."

[katz]

you know what is worst than being able to close a thread that has been finished with....still allowing users to delete it entirely.

[Korpg]

you know what is worst than being able to close a thread that has been finished with....still allowing users to delete it entirely.

It prevents users like Alienmonkey from abusing it when he goes to sleep, just so he can reopen it when he wakes up.

Also deters people from making one post and close the thread so they can put their opinion, however stupid it is, out there and still have the last say in the topic.

By deleting the thread, nobody can read what is said. But deleting threads is still the cheap way to "save face" when discussions go against the original poster.

[katz]

Is there a blist for threads as well as people

[Korpg]

Is there a blist for threads as well as people

yeah, its called "not reading it."

[Bumbeen]

Bumbeen's attack stagger's the SE!

[Alhanelem]

Why? It was the one power we had against the trolls and flamersIt was also being abused by said trolls and flamers, which is the main problem.

[Tsukino_Kaji]

this thread's still going?

lolOf course it is, they can't close it.

[Octaviane]

FYI!!!!! News Flash! You can't close threads now. I only hope that Mods keep a close eye on some of the flame posters and trollers and shut them down.

[Leonlionheart]

FYI!!!!! News Flash! You can't close threads now. I only hope that Mods keep a close eye on some of the flame posters and trollers and shut them down.

woah really?

[Korpg]

FYI!!!!! News Flash! You can't close threads now. I only hope that Mods keep a close eye on some of the flame posters and trollers and shut them down.

What they need to keep an eye on are the people who intentionally cause threads to be closed for their own petty amusements.

[Octaviane]

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxi/threads/10989-EU-Forum-Features-Updated-%28Jul.-6%29?p=139206#post139206


The official notice, I am really surprised no-one saw it.

[Bumbeen]

MWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Tsukino_Kaji]

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxi/threads/10989-EU-Forum-Features-Updated-%28Jul.-6%29?p=139206#post139206


The official notice, I am really surprised no-one saw it.They all did. It has nothing to do with this thread still being active.

[Ravenmore]

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxi/threads/10989-EU-Forum-Features-Updated-%28Jul.-6%29?p=139206#post139206


The official notice, I am really surprised no-one saw it.

It was quoted by me on page 21 we all seen it.

[Octaviane]

It was quoted by me on page 21 we all seen it.

Not everyone did apparently. :)

[Karbuncle]

[Removed by Moderator according to the FINAL FANTASY XI FORUM Guidelines (http://support.na.square-enix.com/rule.php?id=20&la=1).]

In an attempt to not assume, Might i ask you who and what thread you are talking about?

[katz]

You can ask. Im not obliged to answer.

[Tamoa]

I'm going to assume Katz is talking about Korpg's thread regarding the seemingly random moderation of this forum.

It seems to have vanished.

Edit: actually, it was deleted by forum mods and not Korpg.

[Tamoa]

[Removed by Moderator according to the FINAL FANTASY XI FORUM Guidelines (http://support.na.square-enix.com/rule.php?id=20&la=1).]

Being able to delete the contents within a post and edit a post is fine. Being able to delete a thread - personally I don't like that much either, but I'm not going to make a new thread about it.

As for your last comment there - well it shows the difference between you and me. I don't go around throwing random insults at other people on this forum just because I disagree with them.

[Ravenmore]

[Removed by Moderator according to the FINAL FANTASY XI FORUM Guidelines (http://support.na.square-enix.com/rule.php?id=20&la=1).]

Yeah thats taking the high road good. Not much better then the people your insulting.

[Runespider]

Being able to delete the contents within a post and edit a post is fine. Being able to delete a thread - personally I don't like that much either, but I'm not going to make a new thread about it.

Sadly I think the only reason action was taken with what this original post was about was because a few made and locked many threads causing a nuisance, thread deletion isnt going to be able to be abused in the same was so I really doubt they will do anything about it.

[Valaris]

[Removed by Moderator according to the FINAL FANTASY XI FORUM Guidelines (http://support.na.square-enix.com/rule.php?id=20&la=1).]

very well said!! :)

[Leonlionheart]

[Removed by Moderator according to the FINAL FANTASY XI FORUM Guidelines (http://support.na.square-enix.com/rule.php?id=20&la=1).]

Deleting and editing the things you say is fine, though can still be used for the wrong reasons. Most of the time I edit posts to add information or edit typos or things that could easily be misunderstood. However even then there are people who will change their post to screw with other people. Pros and cons.

However deleting an entire thread, then you are stepping on other's words. Somehow it devalues what anyone could say in any given thread, and discourages people replying because hey, if the OP gets his/her little feelings hurt the thread could be gone tomorrow.

Deleting your own threads without proper cause, which would be defined by forum rules, is wrong because you are walking over everyone's posts.

[Raxiaz]

I am quite capable of more than "just sarcasm and insults."

I apologize for my unruly actions and attitudes and will try harder to better display my point of view in topics. I am truly sorry for being so distasteful. I get riled up sometimes. I do wish I could take some things back that I've said. Fortunately, the mods seem to have taken care of that.

"Let it be."