Paul Closing Threads?

From the moderators that I do interact with it's because not all the moderators want the public to know they are a moderator of this forum, that's why.

The mod above chose to explain themselves instead of deleting the thread.

RoD

Most of threads I've seen with a "moderated" message appended, it's done to explain a rule or policy, like "please post web design topics in the web design forum," for example. Instead of just nuking the thread, they're trying to help without getting tied up in a discussion/debate.

That depends on the motive of the poster who reopens an old thread. Many times, it is all too apparent that a spammer with a sig link on a topic searches for all of the old threads on that topic and posts some inane crap to get his sig link in there. It's often very obvious what is going on, as there will be a bunch of old threads reopened and if you look at the posting dates, you'll see the same person opening them.

Lesson: Don't reply to old threads. :-)

George Wright

I have to agree with you here. Especially for those of us who have been here for many years. Your question "How can I make money online in 30 days" or "My rent is due tomorrow and I need money what can I do" may seem very specific and thoughtful to you... but man oh man... have you even tried searching yet? That question has been asked THOUSANDS of times here. Even more frustrating (for me) is that these questions or topics are usually started by an account with 1-10 posts, who joined in the last month (or two), and someone who NEVER follows up or contributes to their thread after the original post anyway. It takes away from the quality discussion and FORUM that the Warrior Forum can be.

Your question or problem may seem specific to you... but odds are its not.

As a couple of people pointed out, I'm only one of the mods. Not the only one. There are better than a half dozen who can close, move, or delete threads anywhere in the forum. Then there are mods who stick to specific areas of the place. There's a fair number of us, all told. Depends on what they add, and how old the thread is.

Most of the time, a search will give you an answer that doesn't require adding comments. If you do a search and don't find what you were looking for, there's a proper way to start a new thread. For example:

"I've looked through a lot of threads about what web host is the best, and I've seen all the arguments about Hostgator and EIG and all that. What I couldn't find is a recommendation for a host that is specifically focused on high-traffic Wordpress sites. Anyone got a recommendation based on personal experience?"

Most of the older threads that get bumped and then locked are bumped by spammers, or people who add something useless. That starts a slew of responses from people who don't realize the OP hasn't logged in for the past 4 years... Well, let's see...

Could it be, in a case like this, that the mod thought it best to make their point at the top of the thread, to avoid a cascade of irrelevant and misinformed responses? Like, for example, a whole bunch of people assuming the OP was right, and going off on a tangent from that?

Seems to me like a sensible way to handle it.

As far as the note which I did leave, and which was quoted in the OP... How many freaking threads do we have to have that ask "What's the best web host" before we start giving people time off over it, rather than just closing threads?

I've seen as many as 5 threads on that topic on the front page at one time. That's not even a function of not using the search option. That's just rude.

There's a hole in the ground where the stain used to be that was all that was left of the horse that was beaten to death in that discussion.

Why leave the note? Because the same people jump into every one of those threads, with the same argument about why Hostgator is evil and EIG has borged half the digital galaxy, blah blah blah. If they see a warning or two, maybe they'll start to point people to existing threads, rather than having the same conversation for the umpteenth time this month. No. We don't. Or there would be a slew of topics that are allowed now which wouldn't be, and a passel of people who'd have been removed from the forum ages past for being pains in the posterior.

No, I am not referring to you with that comment, David.


Paul

WE get frustrated opening up threads with the same questions. So we say things like that. I am the one to usually take up for people but now I understand everyone else's frustration.

We are all here for a purpose and most of us the smart ones are trying to get ahead at what we already do. Some of these people have one purpose and that is to give me a dang blasted head ache.

[chuckle] Most people do.

It's easy for folks to forget that there is a constant flow of new people into and through the forum. They mean well, but haven't yet learned the ins and outs of online communities. That's where mentioning the search function and pointing to useful threads that already exist is helpful. Blasting them for asking the same questions that have been asked for the past 17 years isn't.

There's an obvious exception, but it's mostly confined to the SEO section. Some dipstick posting a thread titled "What is LSI?," with the body of the post saying, "What is LSI? Please discuss in detail." Said dipstick will invariably have a sig file that links to an SEO firm, usually in India, Pakistan, or Bangladesh.

I'm betting all those posts come from just 3 or 4 dipsticks. Yep. We go through a lot of this. Just had yet another conversation today about a topic that gets brought up monthly, and has for years and years. Same frustrations, same response. I keep hoping someone will actually have useful suggestions, but they're always the same.

One day, I'm gonna get surprised and the conversation will yield something new. Really?

Which makes more sense to you? Asking the person who needs an answer to do a few minutes worth of work to see if it's already here, or asking the group in general to waste their time repeating the same things they've already answered 17 times before? Wow. Totally missed the context.

Did you catch the part of the quote that started this where I said "quite a few threads on this already this year?" Considering it's only February, and this wasn't a highly technical topic, I doubt the answers would be all that outdated.

The concern about old info is valid, certainly. That's another reason we lock really old threads that get necrobumped. But it doesn't apply to most of the times people are asked to do a search.


Paul

Really, Is asking someone to do a bit of research really that bad? In most cases they would have the answer to their question in minutes instead of maybe waiting an hour or more for a decent reply...


And that's exactly what would happen if you had 10 threads on the forum asking "where do i start"...

Brent, "I disagree." That's all the justification some folks need to start flinging accusations around.

Most folks are reasonable. Some will either get their way or demand a pound of flesh instead. When it becomes apparent that we're dealing with the latter type, the preferred option is lobotomization. Since that would be redundant, we settle for a ban.


Paul

Graham, Why should the mods waste significant chunks of their days telling people things that anyone old enough to be a member here should be able to figure out if they've read the rules?

There is an additional problem with "explaining" decisions. It leads to ridiculous arguments.

I deleted a comment someone left in a WSO thread recently, and informed the poster by PM that they were welcome to repost their comments, but they could not use LARGE RED FONTS or personal attacks to do it. He accused me of all sorts of conspiratorial nonsense, and alleged that I was somehow protecting a seller from negative comments for my own personal gain.

Wrong, and wrong.

The BIG RED FONTS trick is one used by people who want to artificially give their comments more weight than the thoughts of the other people around them. It's like screaming over a civilized conversation. Rude, and an improper tactic.

The cause of his self-righteous ire? He had a download problem, which was almost certainly user error. (Lots of other people posted reviews the same day.) The seller in question wasn't quick enough to answer his messages - on a Sunday morning.

This is not an uncommon example.


Paul