User thread lock control over their own thread?

[CaptainKipard]

Mods understand the usefulness of prohibiting certain threads from getting replies. For my dev links sticky It'd be great for me to organise information without replies, and allow me to link to specific posts containing specific info.

And a bit related: is there anything in BBcode that allows linking to a specific point in a post like HTML ID?

[vexx32]

Letting members lock their own threads... I don't know. Something tells me people would end up just messing around with it and causing all kinds of shenanigans.

As for the BBCode... well, not really. It can be put together, since vB allows custom BBCodes, but I'm not sure how it's done or how flexible it is.

[CaptainKipard]

I can''t think of any shenanigans.

[KasperVld]

About linking to a specific post: on the top right of the 'postbox' you'll find a number, yours is for example #3. Click it and you'll get a link that you can use in an url to link to that specific post:

[noparse]This is a link[/noparse]

This is a link

Regarding closing your own threads, I'm not convinced of the need and as Vexx said, I fear people will use it for 'shenanigans'.

[CaptainKipard]

I know about linking to posts, I'm asking about linking to specific points in a post. In html you have something like <tag id=something>, which allows you to reference it in a link with a # sign.

This is already used for forum posts, but having that ability inside posts would be great for tables of contents.

[KasperVld]

Ah no, that doesn't currently exist. With the current developments regarding forum software I'm not sure I want to go ahead and implement a thing like that now. I'll keep it on a list though!

[Crimson Sunrise]

How about telling what those non-descript 'shenanigans' are to being with?

[Vanamonde]

Shenanigans such as closing/opening/closing/etc., until nobody knows whether the thread is useful or not. Or throwing the last word into an argument and shutting it down. Closing discussions because the OP didn't get the answer s/he wanted, is bored, doesn't like where the discussion is going. You get the idea.

[Crimson Sunrise]

Shenanigans such as closing/opening/closing/etc., until nobody knows whether the thread is useful or not. Or throwing the last word into an argument and shutting it down. Closing discussions because the OP didn't get the answer s/he wanted, is bored, doesn't like where the discussion is going. You get the idea.

-Make the lock have a time interval period

-The lock has to be approved by a member of he staff with a written reason

-Same applies for thread unlocking

This should solve all presented problems.

[Specialist290]

-Make the lock have a time interval period

-The lock has to be approved by a member of he staff with a written reason

-Same applies for thread unlocking

This should solve all presented problems.

Such requests can already be made via this thread, or if discretion is needed through the Post Reporting system. I don't see how the proposed mechanism is necessarily a great improvement over the ones we already have in place.

[Crimson Sunrise]

Such requests can already be made via this thread, or if discretion is needed through the Post Reporting system. I don't see how the proposed mechanism is necessarily a great improvement over the ones we already have in place.

The users have control over their own threads. That's your improvement. Plus it makes things more organized than a topic, which could be subjected to data corruption or deletion.

[Specialist290]

The users have control over their own threads. That's your improvement. Plus it makes things more organized than a topic, which could be subjected to data corruption or deletion.

I'm not seeing a great difference between "Press a button to send a message to forum staff to evaluate a thread for closure" and "Press a button that says 'Close Thread' that sends a request to forum staff to evaluate a thread for closure." If the end result is exactly the same, then the control you posits that users have over their threads is illusory at best.

[tetryds]

The users have control over their own threads. That's your improvement. Plus it makes things more organized than a topic, which could be subjected to data corruption or deletion.

I don't think you understood, you can either use that OR use the report system.

Simply report the OP of the topic you want to be closed with a good reason for that.

The gains of allowing people to have power of their topics are very minor if compared to the potential issues it can bring, IMO.

[Crimson Sunrise]

I don't think you understood, you can either use that OR use the report system.

Simply report the OP of the topic you want to be closed with a good reason for that.

The gains of allowing people to have power of their topics are very minor if compared to the potential issues it can bring, IMO.

Maybe because, considering all the moderation discussion and things that Vexx32 (Hopefully that's how it's spelled, cause I'm not gonna go back and look) pointed in another thread, that would take too much time for that to be done? Just using the good old Occam's Razor principle there.

[tetryds]

Maybe because, considering all the moderation discussion and things that Vexx32 (Hopefully that's how it's spelled, cause I'm not gonna go back and look) pointed in another thread, that would take too much time for that to be done? Just using the good old Occam's Razor principle there.

I am just pointing out that what you are requesting already exists.

Following K.I.S.S. principle here.

[Crimson Sunrise]

I am just pointing out that what you are requesting already exists.

Following K.I.S.S. principle here.

I may be under the impression that the moderation is either frowned upon by certain users, not trusted or both.

[vexx32]

In my experience, the only people who don't trust us, simply don't know us. And that's fine.

I mean, sure, people sometimes feel as though they got the short end of the stick, but everyone's held to the same rules, and we don't play favourites.

And in any case, the method you are already proposing posits us as an intermediary anyway... although more hidden from the users. And I don't particularly like that, personally, because it's less clear to the users what is going on. If they need to take it upon themselves to ask us, they're well aware that we are the ones who they're talking to. If there's just a button that essentially pages us (which would basically be a duplicate of the Report button anyway, really, except have less usefulness) without telling the users what's going on, it can lead to considerable confusion.

Having the workings of things hidden away neatly like that is something I'm not too fond of, which is why I try to be as transparent as possible whenever people ask. Sure, there are some things we can't have become public knowledge for the sake of the community (users' infraction/warning history, some of the things that are posted by spambots, etc.), but beyond that I tend to prefer that the ways in which we work be pretty transparent. We may not always be understood, but we always try to be.