Thread Closings

[BigApplePi]

Closings: BAP Bashed

BAP*. Don't you realize it is ridiculous to have a thread about closed threads without mentioning open threads? What is the matter with you ... harping in such a one-sided matter? Most threads are either open or about to be opened. Their** is no such thing as opening a closed thread***. So why so hard on closings?

Open threads are here to freely discuss issues. Something is suggested. Perspectives are drawn by every participant. Analysis brings out the details. Connections are made with related issues inviting synthesis. Sometimes inner thoughts bring about free-associations which seem disconnected to the original issue, yet somehow are ... inwardly. Everyone gets to participate. Sometimes there are digressions and oppositely harsh or critical reactions to what is being said. Most of the time their are progressions which help elaborate and clarify the issue.

This is where moderators come in. Moderators um ... moderate so that digressions don't permanently go too far or harsh reactions become so harsh that further discussion on the original issue is thwarted.

May I suggest thread closings give a 24 hour notice or something equivalent?

What about a 24 hour notice one is about to open a new thread? What about the note at the end of this post? Didn't think of that, did you?

I missed issues about a recent poster who wanted alterations to his posts and I never got to provide input. Seems the poster was controversial and tended to arouse sarcastic remarks and the thread was closed or whatever the reason was.

What are you so het up about? What about posters who are creative, providing connections to fresh and interesting topics? Or even age old topics that never go away? They might be acknowledged. Acknowledgment tells them they are not talking to the wind. Just don't say anything that goes to their heads.

This is just my personal view and not the moderator view I assume. I'm sensitive to all forms of what I'll call "censorship."

Poor you. Sensitive, eh? We ALL are sensitive. Who do you think you are? What about the openness and freedom you get to express on a modern communication facility? You can't do that at school or at home or at work, can you? Are you forgetting about that? Learn to be more appreciative.

I realize when a situation is detrimental to the INTPf, this is desirable. Nevertheless I'd like to be able to provide input, rectifying if possible. To me when such actions are taken it's because no alternative ways to handle it were available. Not that I could definitely fix it, but at least I'd like to try.

"Rectifying"? Where did you come up with a word like that? If you have a problem there are plenty of opportunities to rectify the situation. There are your friendly fellow posters. There are sympathetic moderators who are always ready to listen. If you are so eager to rectify I have a place behind the barn where you can rectify all you want.

In general I'd like to be able to at least ask a controversial character or controversial behavior of that character if they'd like to change whatever is causing their situation. This applies also to those who would provoke just a poster.

So now you want to change people? Good luck with that.

In general, there are provocative issues, provocative posters.

Sure there are. Why haven't you mentioned those posters who are helpful, insightful, caring, and concerned about the welfare of this Forum? Why haven't you mentioned moderators who take time out of their personal lives to watch over and care for your welfare keeping trolls at the gates? Who protects you form being eaten by trolls?

*This is a message to BAP. Resist taking it personally.

**I don't want to be critical, so I'm definitely criticizing you against my will. You didn't spell "There" correctly. You have 24 hours to correct it.

***Yes there is. Don't you read what the moderators have told you?

 

[Jennywocky]

This thread just crested 100 posts.

I think it's a great time to commemorate this historic occasion by closing the thread, so as to not sully our memories with further conversation that will only water down the glory that was already explored here.

 

[BigApplePi]

This thread just crested 100 posts.

I think it's a great time to commemorate this historic occasion by closing the thread, so as to not sully our memories with further conversation that will only water down the glory that was already explored here.

My inner genie predicts the crest at precisely 173. Of course winding down is not the same as cutting off. Sometimes dying is best when a process is natural rather than sudden. It allows for tears to be shed and time to say au revoir.

 

[BigApplePi]

Sometimes a thread seems inane, foolish, has no purpose, or is mild sarcasm or a chance for posters to get acquainted. Should it be closed or left open? Your call moderators. I endorse Freud: "Nothing has no meaning except when a cigar is just a cigar" - paraphrase. Even Jung endorsed the collective unconscious.

Such a thread may reveal the characters participating, do no harm, not start fires, or just exist to let off stream. It could also be pure fun. Not everything we do is meant to be serious, you serious INTPs, you.

 

[Hawkeye]

Not everything we do is meant to be serious, you serious INTPs, you.

Not when 90% of the time people source Wikipedia to solve world problems. It's amusing and one of the reasons I view this place like I do: A circus of armchair philosophers. ^^

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a lot of what people type on here, but at times, my god... Analysing the reasons we say Santa is real; it makes me face-palm in disbelief.

 

[BigApplePi]

Not when 90% of the time people source Wikipedia to solve world problems. It's amusing and one of the reasons I view this place like I do: A circus of armchair philosophers. ^^

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a lot of what people type on here, but at times, my god... Analysing the reasons we say Santa is real; it makes me face-palm in disbelief.

Regretfully I may be getting you rong. Sometimes world problems DO get solved. 90% of the time there is an INTP behind this somewhere. Just because they keep a low profile is no reason to denigrate their skills when they practice them on Santa.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFMyF9fDKzE

 

[Hawkeye]

Regretfully I may be getting you rong. Sometimes world problems DO get solved. 90% of the time there is an INTP behind this somewhere. Just because they keep a low profile is no reason to denigrate their skills when they practice them on Santa.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFMyF9fDKzE

I would agree, however I read the Santa thread and therefore I can't.

By the way, I'm loving your music mode at the moment.

 

[Goku]

Sometimes a thread seems inane, foolish, has no purpose, or is mild sarcasm or a chance for posters to get acquainted. Should it be closed or left open? Your call moderators. I endorse Freud: "Nothing has no meaning except when a cigar is just a cigar" - paraphrase. Even Jung endorsed the collective unconscious.

Such a thread may reveal the characters participating, do no harm, not start fires, or just exist to let off stream. It could also be pure fun. Not everything we do is meant to be serious, you serious INTPs, you.

moderators know what is best
do not question the greater purpose behind their actions

 

[Hawkeye]

Fixed*

moderators should know what is best; however they are only human like the rest of us and so can sometimes make mistakes too

Do not question the greater purpose behind their actions because most of the time it's actually not that great. You'll only make it worse by showing the tiniest bit of concern.

 

[Base groove]

Sometimes a thread seems inane, foolish, has no purpose, or is mild sarcasm or a chance for posters to get acquainted. Should it be closed or left open? Your call moderators. I endorse Freud: "Nothing has no meaning except when a cigar is just a cigar" - paraphrase. Even Jung endorsed the collective unconscious.

Such a thread may reveal the characters participating, do no harm, not start fires, or just exist to let off stream. It could also be pure fun. Not everything we do is meant to be serious, you serious INTPs, you.

Nobody showed bad judgement in closing that thread and nobody needs to apologize for it because nobody was in the wrong.

Nobody should have opened it in the first place and nobody knew what it was really about. Nobody.

 

[BigApplePi]

Nobody showed bad judgement in closing that thread and nobody needs to apologize for it because nobody was in the wrong.

Nobody should have opened it in the first place and nobody knew what it was really about. Nobody.

Nobody said a thread had to have meaning. There must be a reason why nobody showed bad judgement. Then let nobody apologize. I demand nobody apologize. Case opened and closed and why nobody knows.

 

[Base groove]

 

[BigApplePi]

Proposed: Closing a thread is like tossing a wet blanket at party time. There will always be a conflict between social order and the fun planting of random seeds which may or may not create something useful. One may have to plant a lot of seeds to get something going. This is what gossip is all about. Throw that wet blanket over this and creativity is dampened.

Next day: I went to a discussion group last night. The topic for the evening was rather clear and people started in on it. Eventually the topic drifted and later went quite off. The founder of the group, who was rather quiet normally, spoke up pointing out speakers had gotten off topic and asked how we could bring it back. Did he propose the group disband and everyone go home because of a failure of the original topic? No. That would be ridiculous.

I suggest a thread is like that. If the initial topic is legitimate, moderators or anyone can bring it back on topic by pointing out the drift. Why punish the thread if there are individual violations which can be transient? Why not caution or warn any violators? Why not bring the thread back to a sensible state?

Later yet: I know this is not a new idea, but it has to be repeated nonetheless. Drama and ill-manners are not necessarily a bad thing if they eventually stimulate creativity. Closing a thread can stifle people's creativity and can eventually diminish a forum itself. This has to be balanced against the objections of some who find discord uncomfortable, non-sensible, threatening or even dangerous.

Moderators? What say you? Do you agree?

 

[BigApplePi]

^ ^ Above addition. ^ ^

 

[Hawkeye]

But this does happen.

Threads are split, separating the derail onto its own track if it is actually a topic and not an all out flame-war. Flame-wars aren't locked instantly either; generally when these types of threads are locked it's because the culprits are banned, or because all that remains are low burning embers to a pretty much expired debate.

 

[BigApplePi]

But this does happen.

Threads are split, separating the derail onto its own track if it is actually a topic and not an all out flame-war. Flame-wars aren't locked instantly either; generally when these types of threads are locked it's because the culprits are banned, or because all that remains are low burning embers to a pretty much expired debate.

True. That is done, but not always. Some threads are just closed, not broken off. You say threads are locked because of culprits. Why punish the thread instead of the culprits? And who is to say a debate is expired if two months later someone likes the topic ... even if there is repetition?

 

[Hawkeye]

True. That is done, but not always. Some threads are just closed, not broken off. You say threads are locked because of culprits. Why punish the thread instead of the culprits? And who is to say a debate is expired if two months later someone likes the topic ... even if there is repetition?

Can you provide an example of a thread that has been locked either recently, or locked in the past that you think should be unlocked?

 

[Base groove]

Can you provide an example of a thread that has been locked either recently, or locked in the past that you think should be unlocked?

Let me guess,

Count to 1 million.

 

[Hawkeye]

Let me guess,

Count to 1 million.

I can kinda see his point.

However, the only thing that has slightly irritated me is when I've written a reply and upon hitting submit, had it rejected because the thread had been locked in the meantime...

 

[BigApplePi]

Can you provide an example of a thread that has been locked either recently, or locked in the past that you think should be unlocked?

Yes. Base groove's guess. This thread for its simplicity over more complex threads.

Count to 1,000,000. What is this an example of? It contains posts both positive and negative. I'm not saying this thread should be opened. I'm saying close a thread like this and all threads are threatened. I want to say if a thread is uncertain as to progress, err on the side of openness. If a thread bothers people (Can't count or No account) let them either state their case or find another thread to play in. Factor this in.

Why give the field to those who are opposed? There is nothing wrong with opposition, just not to give in to it. Let ideas grow, even bad ones. One idea squelched and freedom is squelched. I'm on the side of freedom.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLCEUpIg8rE

 

[Base groove]

Factor this in.

Good pun, BAP.

 

[Hawkeye]

From what I have observed, this forum only seems to like selectively childish things. One minute it will moan about serious topics being derailed by silliness and the next it will go to town on an equally silly idea.

Arguments will be made about how serious one should be and then given the 180 response of "it's just an internet forum maaan".

It's this inconsistent behaviour that causes so much tension and is the reason why I'm still here; I enjoy it.

 

[BigApplePi]

There are always "reasons" for closing threads**. Presumably quality control is an issue. Keep good threads open, but close bad ones. Yet have we adequately defined "good" and "bad" threads?

This is an INTP Forum of and for INTP's especially* provided that the INTP temperament itself doesn't do "bad" things certaintly of which it is capable.

Please notice that "P" is part of the INTP temperament while "J" is not. Although "N" is also, I do have to ask about particulars, particulars being a trait of "S" people. So I ask, why was this thread,

"INTP Forum > Inner Sanctum > Fun Counting to 1,000,000" closed?

Please observe this thread was categorized under Fun, presumably meant for fun and for those fond of numbers. There are plenty of other fun threads for which "J" people could find fault with. Should we close them too? People who dislike violence or music or games perhaps? Since this particular thread was closed, I will note some particulars who participated in its closing and ask, "Why?"


Re: Counting to 1,000,000

I will be honest:

Nothing wrong with honesty. Let's see how honesty is used.

I am totally surprised people are participating in this, especially mods, given that this website has a small problem with bandwidth and precedent has been set long ago regarding a thread of this exact nature.

That's quite a statement. Is it a P or J statement? We know it was made by an INTJ which is okay. He says he is "surprised." Is he? He refers to bandwidth. Since when was the thread taking any bandwidth to speak of? Maybe I missed something. Yes there was a precedent thread, but this is a new day. Don't we give old themes new chances, especially for INTPs who are fond of looking at things in many different ways. INTPs have their own special way of having fun. If there is one thing I can note about INTPs, it is that a good many of them are fond of numbers and like to play with them. I know I'm making a J statement myself, but my judgment is that P people should be allowed to have fun. Am I wrong about this? Please tell me moderators as I want to have trust in those who rule this INTP Forum.

Anyway, carry on, hypocrites.

I strongly hesitate to comment here.


Re: Counting to 1,000,000

Damn you, Gopher!

This statement is not clear to me but what is clear is it was made by a moderator.

I'm not sure if this rest in peace refers to Gopher or the thread, but my IQ tells me it refers more to the thread. That's just a guess I know, but if so it means that the moderator author of the post may have closed the thread. Since I am an INTP, I only have to wonder why a thread I was ready to have fun with was closed. Was it because Gopher mentioned the moderator, the moderator took notice, read a message by an INTJ and acted? I dunno. All I know is a fun thread was closed and I've yet to reason out why.

Will some new naively new poster arrive at the INTP Forum and seeing precedent try to create another like thread? Will that thread be closed also by the righteous when they discover the original post failed to spell out in detail rules and regulations which must be set out in such detail that no one would dare to post something trivial or go off topic or post anything with less than sterling profundity having anything remotely connected with numbers and counting?
______________________________________________

*though those of other persuasions I assume are welcome as long as they honor the INTP temperament

**I realize I may have gone overboard in making this post but when I find anything that restricts my freedom of thought expression I have to ask why. Such restrictions may be small in this case but large in other ones. Arguing small cases is far simpler than arguing large ones.

 

[Base groove]

P statemens? J statements? Get real man.

Anyway, Kuu said that to Gopher... perhaps it would be wise to see what Gopher said?

hmm

oh yah it was: Inb4 Kuu, meaning Gopher anticipated Kuu would close the thread already.

My comments, regarding precedent, were directed at a mod who had spammed the thread with a senseless post, thus contradicting a comment (about bandwidth, no less) a different mod had said in the other thread wherein precedent was set. That is why I suggested hypocrisy was abound.

So maybe you should refer back to the precedent thread... which you also objected to the closing of... and review the comments made by Kuu in that thread and see if you can make the fucking connection this time.

 

[redbaron]

How sandy is your vagina right now BG? Just curious.

 

[Jennywocky]

inb4 close

*Kills Blarraun and hides the corpse*
Ahem. Venti.

Why hide a perfectly good body?

Bon appetit.

 

[redbaron]

I never specified how I hid the body now did I?

 

[Base groove]

It is slightly sandy but I have a good reason. Anyway, I am in a state right now where I am not to be provoked to anger, least of all by BAP or RB.

 

[Absurdity]

Is this really happening

 

[redbaron]

Let's cuddle and talk about our feelings.

 

[Base groove]

Fuck off guys.

 

[The Gopher]

I said inb4 Kuu because Kuu closed the last 1 to 1000000 thread or whatever. Personally I don't mind either way

Also it was a friendly "ahh he got me" kinda statement from Kuu. At first I was surprised I would have to explain this but this is an INTP forum

To the rest of you I'm too tired to be forum psychologist so just leave each other alone :P

 

[BigApplePi]

P statemens? J statements? Get real man.

You want real? P statements are observations drawing no conclusions; J statements are judgments indicating an action to be taken. They can overlap and if so require more explanation.

My comments, regarding precedent, were directed at a mod who had spammed the thread with a senseless post, thus contradicting a comment (about bandwidth, no less) a different mod had said in the other thread wherein precedent was set. That is why I suggested hypocrisy was abound.

That's what I mean by judgment. That's your judgement. Mine was to not even read off topic responses unless funny. I went back and read it and take it to mean this: "The sky may be the limit but please do not accept numbers greater than one million." That doesn't mean I translated it correctly since I'm not versed in the Curillian language.

So maybe you should refer back to the precedent thread... which you also objected to the closing of... and review the comments made by Kuu in that thread and see if you can make the fucking connection this time.

I did as you suggested and found this. Kuu made this statement:

People, please refrain from encouraging such vacuous activities and use our bandwidth and storage space for more edifying posts.

I find that statement to be judgmental and a point-of-view of a non-sympathizer. In my opinion if some do not understand what a thread means, they should not enter in or take condemnatory actions. There are a few threads I object to or question but I never ask they be closed. That would be unfair to those who appreciate what I might not.

 

[Absurdity]

I did as you suggested and found this. Kuu made this statement: I find that statement to be judgmental and a point-of-view of a non-sympathizer. In my opinion if some do not understand what a thread means, they should not enter in or take condemnatory actions. There are a few threads I object to or question but I never ask they be closed. That would be unfair to those who appreciate what I might not.

We have standards that we will continue to enforce with as much consistency as we can muster, regardless of the occasional feathers that are ruffled in the process.

We are aware of your opinion on this matter because you have repeated it ad nauseam. Fortunately, this is not a democracy, so we don't have to give a flying fuck about it. All you're doing now is being annoying for its own sake, and our patience is very finite.

 

[Kuu]

At first I was surprised I would have to explain this but this is an INTP forum

No. This is a disturbance in the force forum: a BAP thread
One cannot rely on the usual expectations to apply within.

Sometimes I think BAP just needs to smoke a bowl and chill out.

 

[Base groove]

BAP, please give an example of a P statement. So far you have only managed to elucidate the concept of a J statement.

 

[BigApplePi]

BAP, please give an example of a P statement. So far you have only managed to elucidate the concept of a J statement.

I'll try. Suppose I restrict my answers to this thread today.

Just curious.

It makes no judgment other than self observation. Never mind if it implies anything.

inb4 close

Stating fact. Never mind if it is a trick.

There are always "reasons" for closing threads**. Presumably quality control is an issue. Keep good threads open, but close bad ones. Yet have we adequately defined "good" and "bad" threads?

This has a tinge of judgment but I don't recall anyone doubting it.

BAP, please give an example of a P statement. So far you have only managed to elucidate the concept of a J statement.

Non-judgmental.

I said inb4 Kuu because Kuu closed the last 1 to 1000000 thread or whatever. Personally I don't mind either way

I tried to locate a P statement by moderators but couldn't find one.

 

[Base groove]

BAP every one of those statements fits the description of a J statement too.

It's bullshit.

Those are both J statements AND P statements just like everything else. You can't report what you see without determining what it is.

God damn.

 

[BigApplePi]

The threads that were closed were pointless gossip threads, or had turned into them.

You mean the overseers never reprimanded the gossipers?

 

[Minuend]

You mean the overseers never reprimanded the gossipers?

Sounds like a J statement

 

[Rook]

http://intjforum.com/showthread.php?p=4184486#post4184486

Hmmmm......

 

[Base groove]

http://intjforum.com/showthread.php?p=4184486#post4184486

Hmmmm......

Such discipline.

Such looooosers

 

[Kuu]

http://intjforum.com/showthread.php?p=4184486#post4184486

Hmmmm......

426 pages of useless, and that's just the continuation. My point exactly.