Let people lock their own threads

[SherbertLand]

Something I've noticed is that someone asks a question, it gets answered fairly quickly, and then off topic discussion starts for the next five pages and mods end up locking the thread anyway. I think non moderators should have the ability to lock the threads they create after their question is answered.

[tehhuntard]

I agree. Would only make sense, and i cant see a downside.

[Zerakou]

But if the answer is indeed answered and the ot is of actual importance but the op just wants to be an ass and lock it bc he doesnt care.... where does that leave you? Sure you could make a new topic but whats the need of it?

Edit: the downside is, someone makes a post to talk about how great ducks are, someone disagrees and believs geese are better.. op doesnt want to state facts about why ducks are better so he locks it.... thus creating anger in all the goose lovers.

[Deleted]

the problem is that these are discussion forums, If a person was to make a thread they could merely put any statement they want in and close it. Henceforth these would no longer be discussion forums.

[SherbertLand]

But if the answer is indeed answered and the ot is of actual importance but the op just wants to be an ass and lock it bc he doesnt care.... where does that leave you? Sure you could make a new topic but whats the need of it?

The goal of a thread isn't to be off topic.

[Deleted]

guy1 makes thread about something
guy2 appears and says he is wrong or whatever
guy1 locks thread.
Admittedly, once you get an answer that you wanted or whatever, you could lock the thread incase trolls appear.

I`m a lil optimistic about it.

[SherbertLand]

the problem is that these are discussion forums, If a person was to make a thread they could merely put any statement they want in and close it. Henceforth these would no longer be discussion forums.

From what I've seen of forums that actually do this, that doesn't happen.

[SherbertLand]

Pretty much spot on what I was gonna say.

Also, let's not forget that off topic threads can lead to interesting discussions.

I guess my goal here is to keep things clean, not cluttered and messy.

[Yunru]

Its a good idea but there should be limit--there should be at least 10 posts done before you would be able to lock a tread and once its locked you get a warning that you cant unlock it any more unles if you ask a mod. Cant be more simple.

[Elysia]

Actually a mod will close the thread if you ask him to, just report your own post.

This. Exactly this.

There are more downsides to allowing people to lock their own threads than there are upsides, to be honest. It takes us pretty much no time at all to lock a thread, so if an OP of a thread has gotten his answer and wishes for it to be closed, he can report his own post and ask us to do so.

[SherbertLand]

Yes, let people create flaming and trolling threads when no mods are available and get awat with it until a mod does arrive.

No.

People already do that.

Its a good idea but there should be limit--there should be at least 10 posts done before you would be able to lock a tread and once its locked you get a warning that you cant unlock it any more unles if you ask a mod. Cant be more simple.

What's the benefit of having atleast ten posts? If your question is answered in the first post, why wait for another nine? If this system would go in effect, people shouldn't be able to reopen threads.

---------- Post added 2011-07-12 at 03:49 PM ----------

This. Exactly this.

There are more downsides to allowing people to lock their own threads than there are upsides, to be honest. It takes us pretty much no time at all to lock a thread, so if an OP of a thread has gotten his answer and wishes for it to be closed, he can report his own post and ask us to do so.

What downsides are there?

[Mudkiper]

So, someone asks a question, gets an answer and locks thread but the answer isn't correct, people can't reply :<.

[SherbertLand]

So, someone asks a question, gets an answer and locks thread but the answer isn't correct, people can't reply :<.

That can happen, but no system is perfect. And if someone takes the first answer they get and find that it's wrong, it's a lesson learned.

[Radux]

Not necessarily the answer you'd probably looking for, but 2 things could happen:

- Let people close their own threads. This would take a large amount of time from the developers to add more controls/administration abilities to all normal users.
- Leave it as is. Report your own thread and it gets closed quickly. There are a plethora of moderators who are on at all hours of the day/night.

In the end, both just require a push of a button, but one is already in place and the other would need work done to make it happen.

So... why do more work when the current system can work just fine? Why fix something that isn't necessarily broken?

[SherbertLand]

But what if the answer itself could cause danger or harm? This forum doesn't just discuss WoW. The computer forum for example, that could end with someone destroying their PC.

Also, it's not uncommon for the first reply to be an obvious troll.

So, again, no.

If someone is asking a question that could determine whether their computer stops working or not, don't you think they would wait for more answers? Contrary to popular belief, people aren't thick as bricks.

Not necessarily the answer you'd probably looking for, but 2 things could happen:

- Let people close their own threads. This would take a large amount of time from the developers to add more controls/administration abilities to all normal users.
- Leave it as is. Report your own thread and it gets closed quickly. There are a plethora of moderators who are on at all hours of the day/night.

In the end, both just require a push of a button, but one is already in place and the other would need work done to make it happen.

So... why do more work when the current system can work just fine? Why fix something that isn't necessarily broken?

First of all, threads aren't really closed quickly. There's a small batch of mods assigned to every section and I only see a few of them actually doing anything and you can't really expect a few people to go through all of the threads and determine whether to lock them or whatever. I've seen flame wars go on for hours. I've obviously never made a forum, but I have seen this system work on forums much larger than this ones with a much smaller average age. I'm just trying to take some load of the mods back so they can make more informed decisions.

Besides, isn't this a section for suggestions? If you only wanted fixes, you shouldn't call it suggestions.

[Sunshine]

If you report the post asking for it to be closed, a mod will do so if it's appropriate. "A small batch of mods" is misleading; we also have global mods and admins who watch posts which are reported. If you'd prefer, you can also PM mods to request the close.

See also previous discussion:

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...lf-moderation)

[SherbertLand]

If you report the post asking for it to be closed, a mod will do so if it's appropriate. "A small batch of mods" is misleading; we also have global mods and admins who watch posts which are reported. If you'd prefer, you can also PM mods to request the close.

That statement was taken only from what I've seen.

[Boubouille]

And no, we won't let you lock your own threads because of the tons of potential abuses. People cutting short discussions when they feel bored, when they want to end an argument, when they want to piss off a moderator trying to clean up the thread and leave it open for further discussion, etc ....

This is a discussion forum, not a Q&A session, there is no such thing as "the question is answered and the thread is now worthless".