What is up with the arbitrary locking of threads?


PDA






McKevrox
February 10, 2009, 12:48 PM
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=5326254#post5326254

This is pretty old, so really not worth discussing or getting upset about.

So what? So what if it's "old" and how are you rating what is and isn't worthy of discussion? How about we lock any and all threads that mention Charlton Heston because any info about him is "old and not worth discussing"...right?

Do you realize that this is how all the gun grabbing libs run their forums? I can understand moving threads or locking stuff that is off topic or turning into flame wars.

But this is kinda ridiculous. I realize I am new here and if this is how things are run, so be it. But...

Not very American, in my honest opinion. :scrutiny:

If you enjoyed reading about "What is up with the arbitrary locking of threads?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Justin
February 10, 2009, 12:54 PM
So, you think it's a good idea that we leave threads open that have content that is two years old?

How do you think it would reflect on us if such a thread resulted in many members erroneously assuming the content was fresh, and flooding the newspaper with responses to an op-ed that's basically ancient news?

hso
February 10, 2009, 01:29 PM
I didn't realise it was so old.

It isn't just about the age of the article, but that times have passed it by. Other members in the thread pointed out that the Heller decision has been handed down since then, cities around the country have dropped handgun bans in response to it and a whole new President with the same party in the majority has taken office in Washington giving us a whole new set of concerns.

Some works are timeless and some are timely. Those that are timely will inevitably grow stale as they are overtaken by events. Perhaps when all the legal wrangling is finished even President Heston's own words will be viewed as having been timely, but right now they still are relevant. A 2007 college newspaper article written by a freshman pre-law student who didn't know enough to get out of his own way stopped being timely almost immediately, but certainly fell that way in 2008.

McKevrox
February 10, 2009, 02:09 PM
So, you think it's a good idea that we leave threads open that have content that is two years old?
Of course. Why not? If it isn't "good", then how exactly is it a "bad" idea? If its pertinent & interesting, then what does it matter? The article is a case study into the psychology of anti gun fascists. I have done much browsing here and I could find you a plethora of threads that meet your criteria of "old content"...why are all those threads still open?

How do you think it would reflect on us if such a thread resulted in many members erroneously assuming the content was fresh, and flooding the newspaper with responses to an op-ed that's basically ancient news?
I think the "reflection" would be benign at best. There are comments there spanning two years. And its an opinion piece and not really a news piece so I don't see how it can be classified as "ancient news" since the authors point was to outline his stance and not really to report news. Worrying about what all the silly things the silly people MIGHT do is well....silly.

It isn't just about the age of the article, but that times have passed it by. Other members in the thread pointed out that the Heller decision has been handed down since then, cities around the country have dropped handgun bans in response to it and a whole new President with the same party in the majority has taken office in Washington giving us a whole new set of concerns.
What? The psychology of the idiot who wrote this MIRRORS that of Obama and his ilk. How that is irrelevant is beyond me. How are the "set of concerns" highlighted in this guy's article different from these so-called "new set of concerns"? Please help me understand.

Some works are timeless and some are timely. Those that are timely will inevitably grow stale as they are overtaken by events. Perhaps when all the legal wrangling is finished even President Heston's own words will be viewed as having been timely, but right now they still are relevant. A 2007 college newspaper article written by a freshman pre-law student who didn't know enough to get out of his own way stopped being timely almost immediately, but certainly fell that way in 2008.
I think it is pretty elitist for you to declare yourself in a position to deem what is timely vs timeless. I think these are just arbitrary actions whose justifications are made after the fact....honestly.

Justin
February 10, 2009, 02:53 PM
Of course. Why not? If it isn't "good", then how exactly is it a "bad" idea? If its pertinent & interesting, then what does it matter?

It is neither pertinent nor interesting because the content is extremely old.

I have done much browsing here and I could find you a plethora of threads that meet your criteria of "old content"...why are all those threads still open?

Because, contrary to popular belief, the moderators do not read every single post made on this forum. Believe it or not, I actually have a day job that entails more than just surfing THR.

I think the "reflection" would be benign at best. There are comments there spanning two years. And its an opinion piece and not really a news piece so I don't see how it can be classified as "ancient news" since the authors point was to outline his stance and not really to report news. Worrying about what all the silly things the silly people MIGHT do is well....silly.

Your new here, so I'm going to be very clear in my explanation. THR is a huge forum with thousands of members. There have been many occasions when concerted efforts from our membership as well as the membership of other firearms forums, have reversed anti-gun corporate policies, flooded news outlets with emails/phone calls, caused public lists of concealed weapons holders to be taken offline, and even jammed the phone switchboard of congress.

This was all as a result of our membership being able to act quickly and en masse to new and developing situations. If ancient content is posted, but gives the appearance of being something new that needs to be responded too, and hundreds/thousands of members respond en masse it causes THR to look stupid as you have effectively done nothing more than to "cry wolf."

But hey, what do I know? I've only been on staff here for several years, so I guess I'm just silly.

What? The psychology of the idiot who wrote this MIRRORS that of Obama and his ilk. How that is irrelevant is beyond me. How are the "set of concerns" highlighted in this guy's article different from these so-called "new set of concerns"? Please help me understand.

Nothing in your posts declaimed the age of the content you linked to, nor did any of your initial posts say anything about this being some sort of psychological insight into the mind of an anti.

I think it is pretty elitist for you to declare yourself in a position to deem what is timely vs timeless. I think these are just arbitrary actions whose justifications are made after the fact....honestly.

So, you think that the staff members here aren't capable of determining that, say, the outcome of the Heller case is perhaps a bit more important and worthy of discussion than, say, an op-ed column that appeared in a college newspaper in 2007?

You don't think that the latest content shouldn't get an edge in being displayed because it's something that the membership at large isn't going to roll its eyes at and respond with a "we've seen this dozens of times already!"?

JohnBT
February 10, 2009, 03:12 PM
"Do you realize that this is how all the gun grabbing libs run their forums?"

It is? Do you spend a lot of time on lib forums? Just curious.

Sorry you got your feelings hurt when your thread got locked.

John

McKevrox
February 10, 2009, 03:46 PM
It is? Do you spend a lot of time on lib forums? Just curious.
Are you honestly curious or are you trying to infer something? A lot of time? Hum…that is subjective but I have spent some time posting things in an attempt to bring sanity to their discussions. Say what you will, but persuading former leftists who in turn go out and buy guns is extremely fulfilling. Extremely.

Sorry you got your feelings hurt when your thread got locked.
Ha...it has nothing to do with my "feelings" and everything to do with people making irrational excuses for poor judgment. None of these excuses are relevant. This is all about saving face.

Control freaks unite!!!!!

Because, contrary to popular belief, the moderators do not read every single post made on this forum. Believe it or not, I actually have a day job that entails more than just surfing THR.
Riiiight. 12,000 posts and you moved my thread within seconds but you are so busy...you can only get around to the forum every blue moon...right?

If I get banned for this..so be it. But I really hope the other mods or more discerning, logical, and tactful than yourself.

bikerdoc
February 10, 2009, 03:53 PM
It's not thursday?

Justin
February 10, 2009, 03:56 PM
Look, you can try to argue that an op-ed column in a college newspaper that was published two years ago is somehow fresh, interesting, or super-relevant content.

But all you're doing is selling yourself toupees.

JShirley
February 10, 2009, 04:04 PM
Okay, you've been given reasons. Move on to something- or if you're unable- somewhere else.

John

If you enjoyed reading about "What is up with the arbitrary locking of threads?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!