Tweet
Re: surprise
Actually, I wouldn't mind some clarification. The rules state the following:
"No flames, personal attacks or contentious off topic comments: The idea is to make this a pleasant environment for everyone."
Ok, first, what is a "flame"? Second, please define "personal attack". I have seen threads locked for disagreements of opinion, but I'd be curious as to the definition of "personal attack". I've also seen threads locked for "contentious off topic comments" that, while I may agree were contentious, were certainly not off topic. I'd like to see a definition of these rules set out as such that it doesn't appear that a moderator is playing favorites with one opinion or another when a thread is locked for a violation. In other words, the rules need to be clarified. Also, when a thread is locked I think it would be helpful if the moderator cited the rule number of the violation or other reason that the thread might have been locked. When someone is accused of breaking a rule, whether it is an individual or a group of individuals, it makes sense that the rule would be cited. That's my can of worms for the evening.
--Charles
Actually, I wouldn't mind some clarification. The rules state the following:
"No flames, personal attacks or contentious off topic comments: The idea is to make this a pleasant environment for everyone."
Ok, first, what is a "flame"? Second, please define "personal attack". I have seen threads locked for disagreements of opinion, but I'd be curious as to the definition of "personal attack". I've also seen threads locked for "contentious off topic comments" that, while I may agree were contentious, were certainly not off topic. I'd like to see a definition of these rules set out as such that it doesn't appear that a moderator is playing favorites with one opinion or another when a thread is locked for a violation. In other words, the rules need to be clarified. Also, when a thread is locked I think it would be helpful if the moderator cited the rule number of the violation or other reason that the thread might have been locked. When someone is accused of breaking a rule, whether it is an individual or a group of individuals, it makes sense that the rule would be cited. That's my can of worms for the evening.
--Charles
sorry that was a good joke. I think that the rules are fairly loose so that the moderators have some room to wiggle. I believe they close a thread typically when someone complains about it. that seems to be what i see. other times i have seen threads closed due to an illegal item that someone is trying to find or aquire or sell. like certain fish or plants, or i think i saw a thread on endangered turles on DFB. Either way it isnt too common for threads to get locked, i have only seen it happen a few times. Now I find it interesting that we get into more trouble when something such as politics/or philisophical ideas are put out there. We all have different opinions on those. thats what makes us individuals, but we all like fish, thats why we are here. And Hanson and Raul know that I am so down for that drink, in fact i wil have one now and make a Toast to FISHBOX, be it Dallas or Houston, or future locations, and to all new members. Enjoy our fish and think back on what brought us together in the first place. the fish, and sometimes Beer :wink:
Comment