can mods say why they lock a thread?

[spinedoc77]

Just curious as I see the Samsung Innovation thread was locked. Why don't mods put a reason why it's locked? It was a great thread and seemed quite respectful. If there are some bad posts just clean them up, issue warnings and move on. I'm curious what was so bad that it had to be locked. It also seems like good practice to mention why instead of just locking it with no explanation.

 

[I7guy]

Just curious as I see the Samsung Innovation thread was locked. Why don't mods put a reason why it's locked? It was a great thread and seemed quite respectful. If there are some bad posts just clean them up, issue warnings and move on. I'm curious what was so bad that it had to be locked. It also seems like good practice to mention why instead of just locking it with no explanation.

You can use the contact us link under support and see if you get more info.

 

[stridemat]

I haven't looked why that particular thread was closed, however understandably it could be for any number of reasons.

I don't believe we have any guidelines on whether we have to leave a reason or not and I know that personally sometimes I do and sometimes I don't.

All we can assume is that thread violated a forum rule and thus was closed and if you require further information then you should use the Contact Us link as noted above.

 

[grahamperrin]

I find https://macrumors.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/requests most useful. Logged in there, it seems much easier to track the requests that are generated as a result of the 'Contact Us' form.

YMMV

 

[apolloa]

Yeah, question the MODS, I have in the past for some of their decisions. But you need to use the contact us option to do so. But if a thread is closed they will have a reason for it.
It's not their full time jobs, and they are from all over the world so can forgive them for not posting reasons for a thread to be closed. I like it when they get stuck into the conversations though. Makes for better relationships I think.

 

[spinedoc77]

I haven't looked why that particular thread was closed, however understandably it could be for any number of reasons.

I don't believe we have any guidelines on whether we have to leave a reason or not and I know that personally sometimes I do and sometimes I don't.

All we can assume is that thread violated a forum rule and thus was closed and if you require further information then you should use the Contact Us link as noted above.

It should be mandatory to put a reason why the thread was closed. The mods are here to govern the forum, but we need to know the mods are doing their job. If a mod closes a thread randomly which did not break the rules, how would we know? I can't see hitting the contact link every time a thread is locked, wasting my time and also wasting the time of the mods in researching and replying. Doesn't it seem easier to take the 10 seconds to simply post up a reason for the closure?

I don't mean to be terse, I know you guys have a tough job, I've also modded on other sites and it ain't easy. I'm just miffed at what was a great thread/conversation which was seemingly closed without rhyme or reason and am weary of it happening again.

 

[dyn]

It's called communication and it seems that it scares the living daylights out of them. I haven't seen any mod communicate about why things are the way they are. The same when upgrading the forum to Xenforo, the twitter stream was almost dead silent (the only thing that was there was the notification that they've started the upgrade). On other forums they usually leave just a small bit of info, like 1 or 2 sentences why the thread is closed. Interventions are also very late, so late that one should question if one should even intervene or just let it be.

Might be a good idea to expand the guidelines to include that at least put in just a bit of info. Takes maybe 10 seconds more when closing the thread but it helps out others a great deal, might even prevent certain situations in the future and prevents users from flooding admins asking for more info. Just a bit of communication makes all the difference.

 

[grahamperrin]

Side note: awareness during migration to XenForo

… The same when upgrading the forum to Xenforo, the twitter stream was almost dead silent (the only thing that was there was the notification that they've started the upgrade). …

At MacRumors Forums there was a banner, during the migration, with reference to two Twitter accounts. From one of the two, with emphasis on some of the tweets from during that migration:

• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/596480201409830912
• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/600127811995697153
• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/600339110239313920
• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/600343339548868608
• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/603300848651886592
• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/604047926915108864
• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/604050437621293056
• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/604325064079757312
• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/605019397674123264
• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/605048149804204034
• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/605050485628895233
• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/605098656048541696
• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/605113730314170369
• https://twitter.com/arnoldkim/status/605140423108108290

 

[C DM]

It's called communication and it seems that it scares the living daylights out of them. I haven't seen any mod communicate about why things are the way they are. The same when upgrading the forum to Xenforo, the twitter stream was almost dead silent (the only thing that was there was the notification that they've started the upgrade). On other forums they usually leave just a small bit of info, like 1 or 2 sentences why the thread is closed. Interventions are also very late, so late that one should question if one should even intervene or just let it be.

Might be a good idea to expand the guidelines to include that at least put in just a bit of info. Takes maybe 10 seconds more when closing the thread but it helps out others a great deal, might even prevent certain situations in the future and prevents users from flooding admins asking for more info. Just a bit of communication makes all the difference.

I don't know. I see some comments posted in most cases when a thread is closed. I've also seen mentions of and discussions about migration as well.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Is willy-nilly moderation a "new feature" of the forums? I just watched a thread close for no other reason than a previously before unknown (as in I've never heard of them) moderator shows up and closes the thread on Yosemite looks terrible! (https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/yosemite-looks-terrible.1751546/page-131#post-21546522) for no other reason than apparently they are sick of reading it. Since when do the rules on here state moderators can close threads for no other reason than personal dislike of the topic? If a thread is healthy and people are obeying the forum rules, it should stay open. Just because someone doesn't like a thread is no reason to close it, IMO. If this is a new "feature" of these forums, I have to say I don't like it at all. A forum is only as good as the people using it and if you want to drive away users, keep closing threads based on your personal bias instead of free and open discussion. See where it gets you in the long run.

 

[C DM]

Is willy-nilly moderation a "new feature" of the forums? I just watched a thread close for no other reason than a previously before unknown (as in I've never heard of them) moderator shows up and closes the thread on Yosemite looks terrible! (https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/yosemite-looks-terrible.1751546/page-131#post-21546522) for no other reason than apparently they are sick of reading it. Since when do the rules on here state moderators can close threads for no other reason than personal dislike of the topic? If a thread is healthy and people are obeying the forum rules, it should stay open. Just because someone doesn't like a thread is no reason to close it, IMO. If this is a new "feature" of these forums, I have to say I don't like it at all. A forum is only as good as the people using it and if you want to drive away users, keep closing threads based on your personal bias instead of free and open discussion. See where it gets you in the long run.

Seems like the reasoning provided there was somewhat different than that. (Kind of surprising to hear that you've never come across anything from that moderator in all the time on the forums.)

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Seems like the reasoning provided there was somewhat different than that.

"Running far past its course" is just another way of this person saying they're "sick" of the thread. That is a personal opinion. Normally, if someone is sick of a thread, they stop reading/following it. Here we have a moderator deciding for EVERYONE that they should stop talking about a subject. Yet Yosemite has not gone away. El Capitain continues the visual trend and here we have someone deciding we should not be allowed to discuss the matter anymore. So yes, I'd say it was a personal moderating decision based solely on them being tired of the thread. Even Apple doesn't ban discussion on the visual changes to OSX. I find this very disturbing on many levels, particularly if it's a sign of things to come in future discussions. I've been here since 2007 and this is not a common reason to close a thread.

In fact, threads are rarely closed period. They tend to burn out when the topic is no longer relevant. Given El Capitain looks very similar to Yosemite, I don't see the relevance going away and I personally don't want to find myself banned for making comments about El Capitain at some point in its inevitable discussion that this Sandbox General doesn't agree with or points to a closed thread and deems it out of bounds. Yosemite's looks will have run its course when El Capitain comes out and then El Capitain's look and feel and features will be the topic to discuss, etc.

Anyone that doesn't want to discuss the look and feel of OSX probably shouldn't be in a MACINTOSH FORUM to begin with. I fail to see how it's run its course given we all still use OSX and Yosemite is still the current version.

 

[C DM]

"Running far past its course" is just another way of this person saying they're "sick" of the thread. That is a personal opinion. Normally, if someone is sick of a thread, they stop reading/following it. Here we have a moderator deciding for EVERYONE that they should stop talking about a subject. Yet Yosemite has not gone away. El Capitain continues the visual trend and here we have someone deciding we should not be allowed to discuss the matter anymore. So yes, I'd say it was a personal moderating decision based solely on them being tired of the thread.

Generally it's another way of saying that the same thing just keeps on getting rehashed and things are mostly just needlessly going in circles. Doesn't seem there's any implication of anything else, especially on a personal level (aside from perhaps something that someone might want to read into it even if it's not there).

 

[Gwendolini]

a previously before unknown (as in I've never heard of them) moderator

He is "kinda new": https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/announcement-two-new-additions-to-the-moderation-team.1463433/

As for the closing, it is a thread with repeating statements with 3260 something posts. What new is there to add, really? Once El Capitan is released, the Yosemite "haters" can convene there for another year.

Reason for editing:""

 

[grahamperrin]

A partial thumbs up, but these points deserve attention:

… the same thing just keeps on getting rehashed …

… repeating … What new is there to add, really?

With all due respect, few people were suitably familiar with the topic in its entirety.

Defocus, please, from the moderator's note of closure.

Instead, shortly before closure:

• https://www.dropbox.com/s/uyug7k8mfns4xsr/page 130.pdf?dl=0

– please view that page as a whole.

 

[spinedoc77]

He is kinda new: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/announcement-two-new-additions-to-the-moderation-team.1463433/

As for the closing, it is a thread with repeating statements with 3260 something posts. What new is there to add, really? Once El Capitan is released, the Yosemite "haters" can convene there for another year.

I don't think it's for the mods to decide there is nothing new to add, I don't care if it has 30 million posts. If it's that lengthy then obviously forum users are utilizing the information. The entire function of a "forum" is to keep relevant and popular discussions front and center, and as they become less relevant and popular they fall off. For a mod to close a thread that is following the rules doesn't make sense, they are closing something that a lot of forum users are benefiting from.

 

[C DM]

I don't think it's for the mods to decide there is nothing new to add, I don't care if it has 30 million posts. If it's that lengthy then obviously forum users are utilizing the information. The entire function of a "forum" is to keep relevant and popular discussions front and center, and as they become less relevant and popular they fall off. For a mod to close a thread that is following the rules doesn't make sense, they are closing something that a lot of forum users are benefiting from.

I can't specifically speak for the one particular thread that was brought up, but in most instances when threads are closed like that back and forth bickering that is usually just between a few users as best and ends up rehashing the same things over and over certainly doesn't contribute much by that point and really only clutters up the forum.

As for popularity and essentially applying a pure maket system to it all--popularity of something doesn't really make it good or useful or worthy of much--otherwise mob mentality would always be part of important events, and figures like Justin Bieber would be important people truly contributing something worthwhile to the society.

 

[OllyW]

"Running far past its course" is just another way of this person saying they're "sick" of the thread. That is a personal opinion.

I'm not sure about the actual details but with a thread like that one it's more than likely the thread has been closed because of the amount of time the moderators have had to put into the thread in an attempt to keep it on topic, free from bickering and open. It can eventually gets to a point where there is nothing new being added to the thread just the same old arguments that have been hashed out since the first few pages of posts, so we may decide the thread has "run it's course" and it's time to shut it down.

Also remember, you are seeing the thread after the mods have cleaned it up so you might not think there has been a problem when in reality there have been dozens of deleted post, warnings issued and maybe even a few time-outs.

 

[grahamperrin]

In the context of the opening post, here, I think I understand where @spinedoc77 is coming from. However –

… The entire function of a "forum" is to keep relevant and popular discussions front and center …

– with respect: there is, or should be, more to a forum.

If that location (centre, front) is given entirely or overwhelmingly to topics that fit both criteria (popular, relevant) then tens of thousands of posts will gain no response.

 

[LadyX]

I'm not sure about the actual details but with a thread like that one it's more than likely the thread has been closed because of the amount of time the moderators have had to put into the thread in an attempt to keep it on topic, free from bickering and open.

Well that's their job right? It's not fair for the other posters. The thread should not have been locked, I did not post in it but I have been reading the posts and there was nothing wrong. The mod who locked it should have at the very least provided a reason prior to locking it.

 

[balamw]

Well that's their job right? It's not fair for the other posters. The thread should not have been locked, I did not post in it but I have been reading the posts and there was nothing wrong. The mod who locked it should have at the very least provided a reason prior to locking it.

MOD NOTE: Please keep in mind the entirely of OllyW's post you quoted part of. Just because you don't see a problem with a thread as it sits today, it does not mean that we have not:

1. Received many reports on that thread over a period of days
2. Acted on those many reports in that thread
3. Removed lots of inappropriate content in the thread
4. Spent more time dealing with just that thread than any others.
5. etc...

I'm not sure about the actual details but with a thread like that one it's more than likely the thread has been closed because of the amount of time the moderators have had to put into the thread in an attempt to keep it on topic, free from bickering and open. It can eventually gets to a point where there is nothing new being added to the thread just the same old arguments that have been hashed out since the first few pages of posts, so we may decide the thread has "run it's course" and it's time to shut it down.

Also remember, you are seeing the thread after the mods have cleaned it up so you might not think there has been a problem when in reality there have been dozens of deleted post, warnings issued and maybe even a few time-outs.

We generally do post a note indicating why a thread was closed. However, we are human and one of us may occasionally miss a step in our normal processes.

B

 

[LadyX]

MOD NOTE: Please keep in mind the entirely of OllyW's post you quoted part of. Just because you don't see a problem with a thread as it sits today, it does not mean that we have not:

1. Received many reports on that thread over a period of days
2. Acted on those many reports in that thread
3. Removed lots of inappropriate content in the thread
4. Spent more time dealing with just that thread than any others.
5. etc...

We generally do post a note indicating why a thread was closed. However, we are human and one of us may occasionally miss a step in our normal processes.

B

Yes see, I/we had no idea. I wouldn't have said what I said earlier if we were given an explanation like the one you just listed. I know you guys are only human and sometimes you forget to post a note but I'm pretty sure there are mods who just lock threads and knowingly do not post any sort of explanation. And then threads like this one start to show up. Anyway, thank you balamw and OllyW. And I apologize. I did not mean anything by my post. I know moderating is hard work and I appreciate it.

 

[spinedoc77]

In the context of the opening post, here, I think I understand where @spinedoc77 is coming from. However –



– with respect: there is, or should be, more to a forum.

If that location (centre, front) is given entirely or overwhelmingly to topics that fit both criteria (popular, relevant) then tens of thousands of posts will gain no response.

If they gain no response then that means they didn't deserve a response and should filter down and away from viewers eyes. Unless these forums want to dictate content and decide which threads are worthy of being on the front page, but traditionally that's the function of the forum users. Of course these are privately owned forums and the owners can do as they wish if that's their intent.

I can certainly sympathize with a mod who is faced with a thread which requires a lot of work, but isn't that a cop out? If these forums don't have the manpower to keep good threads open then should a re-evaluation of resources be in order? What is the gauge of a post "running its course"? Are we subject to the individual patience of each moderator? Or is there a tangible policy when a thread should be closed? 5 warnings? 10 reports? 8 clean ups? Really I'm just playing devils advocate as we have to trust that the mods were screened and hired with some confidence in their ability. But not everyone is perfect, and I've been on the other side of receiving an overly harsh penalty which I had reversed a couple of times.

Anyway I was just curious as to why this particular thread was closed. I'll assume it had "just run its course". The "run its course" is somewhat debatable as I guarantee that the VAST majority of posts on here begin with information or opinion, then by the 2nd or 3rd page are 99.9% opinions versus other opinions. I suppose the real marker of closing a thread down is the behavior of the forum members, which we don't always see because it's edited out and makes sense.

 

[balamw]

MOD NOTE:

The mod team works as a team. Even though you may see one of us take a particular action, that is usually done after consultation with other members of the team. And it is always done in plain sight of the rest of the team and the admins. Neither of these threads were closed down by a rogue individual mod. Both were closed by a consensus decision by several members of the team.

We've got a large body of experience to draw on where we have a pretty good idea of where a thread is going when we see particular type of behavior in it as reported by the membership. (Even those mods who are kind of new like @SandboxGeneral, who have only been moderators for over 2.5 years )

As @spinedoc77 suggests, catch-all threads that are largely subjective in nature, such as both "Samsung Innovating Hard" or "Yosemite Looks Terrible" have a limited life span before they devolve into bickering or drag in other topics and thus lose their original focus. They tend to have a good initial run, particularly during the initial period when a new product is introduced and change is immediately apparent, but as time goes on that value diminishes rapidly.

In particular with the Yosemite thread: When a thread has been going on for a year and 3000+ posts it's very easy for the same topics to be hashed and rehashed and rehashed. At this point it would be better to start a new specific thread about a specific thing in Yosemite or El Capitan that "looks terrible" rather than to keep posting in a catch all, initial reaction, thread.

Please also note that we used to limit threads to ~1000 posts at which point they would be closed and a new follow on thread created.

Similarly for the Samsung Innovating Hard thread. The general topic is a subjective one which tend to bring out differing opinions and as such can get real personal real fast.

B

 

[grahamperrin]

From can mods say why they lock a thread?:

… The entire function of a "forum" is to keep relevant and popular discussions front and center …

… with respect: there is, or should be, more to a forum.

If that location (centre, front) is given entirely or overwhelmingly to topics that fit both criteria (popular, relevant) then tens of thousands of posts will gain no response.

If they gain no response then that means they didn't deserve a response …

Again with respect: my experience, before I chose to actively participate at MacRumors, proved otherwise.

Many deserving topics were overlooked. I was never a moderator but I did occasionally step away from the rushing, noisiest areas to answer as many as possible of the questions that everyone else had ignored. Some of those questions were from newcomers, or relative newcomers. I hoped to make those people feel welcome.