Sincere Belief

[PresidentMike]

I'm posting this with the knowledge that it could well get me into trouble. But this is the "site feedback" forum, and I've got some feedback.

I have had a moderator(s) close two of my threads that, in my opinion, should not have been closed. I am hoping that someone will be able to explain or clarify the logic behind these actions.

1) A humor thread releating to google.com, specifically to unique results when searching for "French military victories." The moderator closed it because of the threat of French bashing.

I agree that there was a *threat* of French bashing, but no actual bashing had yet taken place. The post was made in good humor, and that was obvious. If people had begun to abuse the privelage, then by all means close it. It should have been something that the moderators kept their eyes on, not something to be closed right out of the gate.

That was the tactic in a thread I posted on Quebec, asking about the province's sterotype. The moderator modified the title, but otherwise allowed the thread to remain open, promising to take action if the posts turned ugly. The debate remained friendly and amicable and the thread remained open. Why not give the French google joke the same opportunity?

2) A 4 post poll and discussion on U.S. presidents. The first three threads were polls, in order to encompass all 43 presidents. The fourth thread was to be the central discussion/debate thread.

The moderator informed me that I should pick some nominees and conduct the vote/debate all in one thread. Two out of the three threads I had posted up to that point were deleted. On my request, the final thread was closed.

I do not understand the logic behind this decision: what is the problem with having four, inter-connected threads? The whole idea was to have an epic discussion about the most powerful elected office on earth and the men who have held it. I understand that the moderator's job is to keep order and, to a certain extent, direct traffic, but I do not see any harm in any of my posts. All were connected by links, and it should have been relativley easy to navigate from one to another. If the members who visited the forum thought the idea clumsy/far-fetched/etc., then they would have said so, the threads would have faded into the background and that would be that.

I am not trying to personally attack the moderators: I think that they do a fine job. They've closed several other threads that I began, and rightly so; in retrospect, I should have known better than to post them in the first place. But in these two cases, I sincerely believe they were in error.

 

[Perfection]

We've had a lot of issues with french bashing, it's almost garunteed to occur.

Also, an epic 3-4 thread discussion can cause problems when it drowns out other threads.

You should try PMing the mods first, never start a moderator action compliant thread, they view it as undermining their power.

 

[Turner]

Yeah. . .PMing would have been a good place to start. If you scroll back in SF, there were the 'old days' when thread closing came up, and it wasn't pretty.

Might one suggest that you edit your post, and PM the moderator in question and ask for clarification on things? Mods don't mind being questioned, one-on-one, but something like this doesn't last very long.

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

We have beem closing those France surrender threads, repeatedly for over a year here, since the no bashing rules were extended to Nationality, long before you arrived.
1. They are french basing
2. They were hardly funny even when original
3. They are so told, tired, and seen so often to have last any humor value.
4. Do not post any more of them at CFC


The moderators for the history forum, particularly XIII, are charged with improving and directing the dicussion there to be useful and efficient. It is one of our task to make such decisions and actions with regard to the poll threads you describe.

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

For #1, I would say that is was closed because it was not presented in the same way the WMD google threads were. Even though they can be done in the same fashion.

Instead of giving the instructions on doing the action, the end result site was only given. Not much humor in that.

Second, while the WMD google threads can be seen as insulting to the US, it actually covers a wider range of countries in its message, plus, it's actually somewhat amusing.

2) If you do not know why your threads were removed, then ask the Moderators who did it. I would think that a 4 thread poll is a bit much to be feasable.

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

Please note that in addition to your multiple violations in posting a "France surrenders" thread in the History forum, edit: its appears that posting in the history forum was in error, that the thread was intened for the humor forum to begin with for which you escaped somewhat lightly, in my opinion, and apparently without having absorbed lessons from the warning thus recieved, you have here violate this balck and white forum rule:
".......
Public discussions of moderator actions are not allowed on the forum. It is also prohibited to protest moderator actions in titles, avatars, and signatures. If you don't like something that a moderator did, PM or email the moderator and try your best to resolve the problem or difference in private. If it's not resolved or if you don't receive a reply from the moderator after 24 hours, you can then PM or email Thunderfall."

Since this occured in Site Feedback, Thunderfall's personal demesne, he will decide whatever action acrues for this.

Edit: He has decided that a further warning is appropriate.
Moderator Action: Please note that publicly posting threads or posts to complaining about moderator action is prohibitted by site rules. Please note the appropriate procedure in the rules, copied above.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889