Locking our own threads

[sunnyboy]

Sometimes instead of a waiting for a Moderator to lock your thread, why can't we be able to lock our own threads? For whatever reason, I mean like really, it's your thread.

For Example, you make a thread and some time later you don't want it open any more, but to contact a Mod to close it, you know will take a while.. so it's easier for us to close.

By closing I mean, we can lock any of our threads 1 time, but are not able to open it.

It's ok if it's turned down, just wondering lol.

 

[KidRambo]

We already had this, but as usual people abuse the powers MentaL kindly gives us.

 

[Grenadier]

We already had this, but as usual people abuse the powers MentaL kindly gives us.

How can you abuse locking your own thread? Lulz

 

[sunnyboy]

We already had this, but as usual people abuse the powers MentaL kindly gives us.

What Anal Sex told said.

It's our own threads, why can't we lock them when we want to? Locking as I said perm and cannot be unlocked unless by a Mod for a good reason

 

[RevoLand]

How can you abuse locking your own thread? Lulz

Maybe not everyone but should subscribers can do it.

 

[sunnyboy]

Maybe not everyone but should subscribers can do it.

No, it should be for everyone. Subscribers have nuff stuff.

 

[KidRambo]

The thing is, there isnt an option in cb admin panel where you can choose to lock threads without having open threads aswell.

 

[Delici0us]

The thing is, there isnt an option in cb admin panel where you can choose to lock threads without having open threads aswell.

Yes there is... :$:

 

[El Jamie]

From what I can remember, we were told we couldn't have this again as people were opening threads that had been closed by moderators.

 

[sunnyboy]

From what I can remember, we were told we couldn't have this again as people were opening threads that had been closed by moderators.

Can't it be set the user can only Lock their threads and after he/she locks it, they cannot unlock it any more like a perm lock unless unlocked by a good reason request to a Mod. Plus why would they be able to unlock other threads? O-o

 

[Shoelace]

Can't it be set the user can only Lock their threads and after he/she locks it, they cannot unlock it any more like a perm lock unless unlocked by a good reason request to a Mod. Plus why would they be able to unlock other threads? O-o

There will be lots of locked threads and it wouldn't look so nice. Also if someone locks the thread then wants to open it then close it, it might get annoying for the MOD to open the threads.

 

[sunnyboy]

There will be lots of locked threads and it wouldn't look so nice. Also if someone locks the thread then wants to open it then close it, it might get annoying for the MOD to open the threads.

That's why when he/she closes his/her thread, they can only have a really good reason to give a mod to re-open which is a rare case as when you close it, you mean for it to stay close.

 

[bobsobol]

It's not just that, people lock their thread when the don't want to see the responses people give. They open a troll thread (sometimes out of ignorance, rather than malice) and lock it, then you get hundreds of new threads opened to respond to the troll.

If you can't close the thread, the responses come in-line and you delete the entire thread... job done.

Moderators should not (according to my training) close threads because users ask them to. We only close threads which have become derailed, but contain useful information. (and pinned topics to which no reply is desired, ofc)

Does that answer the question?

--- EDIT ---
P.S. Yes, we did have the ability to close our own thread after a certain post-rank... it didn't seem that bad to me, but I saw the heartache it caused moderators of other sections. So the current policy is for the best IMHO.

Think about a natural conversation between friends. What would happen if the person who started the conversation could gag everyone else when they'd had enough? I suspect they'd continue the conversation elsewhere, or just ignore the initiator. The same thing happens in forums. You don't really own a conversation just because you started it... anyone who has contributed, or is in the same room instantly takes possession of it. Once started, it is public domain, and public property.

 

[sunnyboy]

It's not just that, people lock their thread when the don't want to see the responses people give. They open a troll thread (sometimes out of ignorance, rather than malice) and lock it, then you get hundreds of new threads opened to respond to the troll.

If you can't close the thread, the responses come in-line and you delete the entire thread... job done.

Moderators should not (according to my training) close threads because users ask them to. We only close threads which have become derailed, but contain useful information. (and pinned topics to which no reply is desired, ofc)

Does that answer the question?

--- EDIT ---
P.S. Yes, we did have the ability to close our own thread after a certain post-rank... it didn't seem that bad to me, but I saw the heartache it caused moderators of other sections. So the current policy is for the best IMHO.

Think about a natural conversation between friends. What would happen if the person who started the conversation could gag everyone else when they'd had enough? I suspect they'd continue the conversation elsewhere, or just ignore the initiator. The same thing happens in forums. You don't really own a conversation just because you started it... anyone who has contributed, or is in the same room instantly takes possession of it. Once started, it is public domain, and public property.

Ahhhhhhhhh, I understand what you mean and yeah that can and will get annoying.

I guess there isn't a point any more for this thread.

Thanks everyone.

 

[V for Vendetta]

This would of been a good idea because people can lock but then it needs to be done on a specific rank they get for either posting or either buying subscriptions and you can only close and you can never re-open would be great.

 

[Monolith]

My personal opinion is it would be a good idea if a person has proven themselves worthy of such a power. If you have been at RZ for a few years and haven't been any trouble then you have proven yourself mature enough to have such a power.

I really only see it being good for possibly controlling flaming in a thread that person created. Say I create a thread somewhere and it turns into a flame war....mods can get busy and sometimes take a while to take care of things...so I have the ability to "abandon thread" so to speak and lock it to control said flaming.

I can also see how someone being upset and not getting to respond in said flame war would probably just create a new thread to "get the last word in".