• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why was this thread locked?

C

Craig234

Lifer
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=52&threadid=2047107&enterthread=y

It's a perfectly appropriate political topic. Why does it matter whether the trigger for discussing it was the content in someon'e sig or not?

The moderator who reacted to it said he's not the usual moderator for the forum. This appears to me a mistake?

Also, I'd assumed that the moderator's 'waving' snide cmment was well-aimed at the posted who criticized the thread - if that's not the case, it seems very inappropriate.

Was there anything in the post I made deserving of snide name-calling by a moderator? Even the person I was criticizing defended the thread as a good political discussion.

I'd like to see an apology if the guest moderator's remark was at my thread.
 
Call-out thread?

GoPackGo
"OK Mods, A whole thread as flame to a poster?

Is this really necessary? Isn't it against the rules?

Can we all make similar threads flaming the poster of our choice?"

Mod response:
"While I'm not the regular mod of this forum, I just happened to be passing thru and saw this thread. As usual, there is always some buffoon showing off his donkey in public. "


 
Originally posted by: allisolm
Call-out thread?

GoPackGo
"OK Mods, A whole thread as flame to a poster?

Is this really necessary? Isn't it against the rules?

Can we all make similar threads flaming the poster of our choice?"

Mod response:
"While I'm not the regular mod of this forum, I just happened to be passing thru and saw this thread. As usual, there is always some buffoon showing off his donkey in public. "
Click to expand...

I don't really see why it is a call out thread - ProfJohn's sig brings up a debatable, partisan issue that is political in nature. As he put this in his sig and not in a thread, it can't be debated until a thread is made to discuss it. If anything, ProfJohn should be admonished for trolling with his sig - especially if no one else is allowed to bring it up.
 
Yeah, looks like a "call-out thread" to me.

The moderator who posted did so at 5:22 am, if the time stamps are accurate (s)he left it open and many others posted subsequently. So, either (s)he came back and locked it, or another mod did (again, if the time stamps are accurate).

Fern
 
What utter nonsense - I don'teven know what a 'call-out' thread is, but this is simply a discussion of JFK, a political issue - specifically, the claims about JFK made by ProfJohn. If posting about the claims someone makes on a political issue is wrong, then the whole forum is wrong. Even the purported 'target', ProfJohn, posted that he's happy with the thread as political discussion, so who are the people who are complaining for his benefit and what did they smoke?

What does it matter whether the discussion of JFK is triggered by a movie, or a post, or a sig?
 
Your title and initial commetns made it seem like a call-out.

Had you worded it differently, not seeming as an attack against Prof John, the thread might have stayed open.
 
Originally posted by: Craig234
What utter nonsense - I don'teven know what a 'call-out' thread is, but this is simply a discussion of JFK, a political issue - specifically, the claims about JFK made by ProfJohn. If posting about the claims someone makes on a political issue is wrong, then the whole forum is wrong. Even the purported 'target', ProfJohn, posted that he's happy with the thread as political discussion, so who are the people who are complaining for his benefit and what did they smoke?

What does it matter whether the discussion of JFK is triggered by a movie, or a post, or a sig?
Click to expand...

I'm not a mod, but my guess is that a thread ventures into "call-out" territory when you put another member's nick in the title and challenge their views etc (unilaterally starting a "debate" with them by calling out their name and challenging their "views"). This is to be contrasted when doing so to another member after they have started a thread, or posted a response in the body of a thread.

It's not the most eggregious example I've seen (there was bonifide political content).

I think if you had "finessed" it a bit there would have been no problem. But again, I'm not a mod and don't really know.

Fern

Edit: dang I'm a slow typist, Eaglekeeper beat me to it.
 
Well, Fern, it needs to be examined what the reason is for the other poster's name in the thread is. Is it to make it a personal attack, or for identifying the topic?

It's unusual for the topic to be triggered by someone putting a message, and argument, in their sig, but that's the case here, and there's nothing inappropriate about the thread; it just needed the explanation where it was from.

Moderators are supposed to apply some jugement... and judgement here would note it's a fine political discussion, even according to the purported 'victim' who was supposedly attacked personally, but wasn't.

pcslookout, fine, but it should only be threads that are a problem.

They should re-open the thread, and the moderator who made the 'waving' comment should apologize for the baseless name-calling/attack.

Since when is discussing JFK's presidency 'waving your e-penis' or whatever s/he said?

We examined it all it's going to be, and have made the determination that the thread was a callout. Drop it! Be thankful you weren't sent on a vacation.

AnandTech Moderator
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top