Question about P&N locking

[CADsortaGUY]

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=52&threadid=2222086&enterthread=y">Locked because this thread has hit bottom. The OP's views in this thread have been sufficiently discredited.

Harvey
Senior AnandTech Moderator</a>

So is this the standard for locking threads in P&N? Just curious... I don't really care about the thread - just curious if it is some new standard or not.

 

[Perknose]

After being left open for 7 months, with well over 400 replies, a thread with this long-discredited-by-events OP:

t looks like the worst economy in decade never turned out to be that bad after all.
As many have said it was nothing more than a mental recession.

Gas prices continue to fall. Jobless claims have fallen for three straight weeks. There is apparently some good news developing on the housing front (lowered prices are finally starting to drive people back into the housing market)

My guess is that we see a decent 3rd quarter and then another poor 4th quarter (4th quarters tend to suck) and then perhaps next year we get a real rebound.

. . . was mercifully locked.

The corpse of that particular dead horse, having been loooong and thoroughly beaten, was beginning to smell.

If you truly have trouble understanding why, and somehow honestly think locking said thread represents some startling and provocative new moderating standard (and not mere common sense), I fear that no reasonable reply of mine could possibly prove helpful to you.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Perknose
After being left open for 7 months, with well over 400 replies, a thread with this long-discredited-by-events OP:

t looks like the worst economy in decade never turned out to be that bad after all.
As many have said it was nothing more than a mental recession.

Gas prices continue to fall. Jobless claims have fallen for three straight weeks. There is apparently some good news developing on the housing front (lowered prices are finally starting to drive people back into the housing market)

My guess is that we see a decent 3rd quarter and then another poor 4th quarter (4th quarters tend to suck) and then perhaps next year we get a real rebound.

. . . was mercifully locked.

The corpse of that particular dead horse, having been loooong and thoroughly beaten, was beginning to smell.

If you truly have trouble understanding why, and somehow honestly think locking said thread represents some startling and provocative new moderating standard (and not mere common sense), I fear that no reasonable reply of mine could possibly prove helpful to you.

Again, is it some new standard or not? Just because YOU and Harvey think it is "discredited" doesn't mean it is. Yes, there was lots of trolling and yes it was semi-old but why not use those as the excuse to lock it instead?

My guess is that we see a decent 3rd quarter and then another poor 4th quarter (4th quarters tend to suck) and then perhaps next year we get a real rebound.

You are Harvey really think that was really "discredited"?

:shrug; Just curious why other "discredited" threads aren't locked if that is the standard...

 

[Harvey]

CAD -- The thread was started on 8/28/2008, it's over 7 freaking months old, and PJ's point at the time was overtaken by events that proved that he couldn't have been more wrong if he tried. :roll:

At this point, the only people replying to the thread were doing so to rub PJ's nose in his own error.

Consider my lock an act of kindness.

< sarcasm >

At least, it was more humane than euthanasia. :shocked:

< /sarcasm >

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Harvey
CAD -- The thread was started on 8/28/2008, it's over 7 freaking months old, and PJ's point at the time was overtaken by events that proved that he couldn't have been more wrong if he tried. :roll:

At this point, the only people replying to the thread were doing so to rub PJ's nose in his own error.

Consider my lock an act of kindness.

< sarcasm >

At least, it was more humane than euthanasia. :shocked:

< /sarcasm >

Again, I understand it was semi-old but there are plenty of old threads out there. Also if that was the reason - why not state so?

Again, his opinion at the time may not have come true but for you to suggest it was "discredited" is laughable if you look at what I quoted from his OP. Also, as asked - is this a new standard for P&N? "discredited"

OK, if it was "kindness" then why did you feel the need to use the "discredited" excuse instead of just stating it was "old" or due to the obvious trolling in the thread? Kind indeed...

 

[bsobel]

Your not supposed to notice that Harvey hates PJ so stop looking behind the curtain.

 

[dphantom]

I don't disagree with the thread being locked. I do have a serious issue with the stated reason for doing so. Highly unprofessional IMO.

 

[ProfJohn]

Since P&N is mainly filled with personal opinions I think one could make the argument that half the threads are 'discredited' and therefore by this new standard need to be locked.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: bsobel
Your not supposed to notice that Harvey hates PJ so stop looking behind the curtain.

Perhaps Harvey shouldn't be locking my threads...

Considering the number of MODs that post in P&N I am sure someone else will notice anything that needed to be locked.

 

[Rio Rebel]

This thread raises a fair question of the standards of why threads are locked.

Questioning Harvey's feelings toward a member and accusing him of moderating on that basis is not something to be discussed here and will not be allowed. This will be my only warning on that subject.

Rio Rebel
Senior Moderator