Page 1 of 2
some threads should be deleted instead of locked?
Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 18:28
by iamacup
Like the recent TN cheat thread and then the Ban Ranti thread, basically, both posters knew there was a very very high chance of them getting locked very fast but they still post them.
locking threads like that is not a deterent and therefore people still post them as they are still in the forum and people can still read them so the message they origionaly were trying to get accross will still be there. maybe if the thread were to be deleted we would get less of this ....
just my thoughts.
Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 19:37
by Min3mat
NO, otherwise the lulz would be lost...FOREVER :O
Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 19:52
by Drone_Fragger
Like the Azu triology! Where would we be without the lulkz from the Azu threads!
Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 20:28
by SwiftSpear
I'd agree. Mods, if it's bad just send it to spambox and notify the poster via PM if you feel necessary to let them know it's bad.
Posted: 18 Oct 2006, 15:32
by raneti
NO, otherwise the lulz would be lost...FOREVER :O
i double that
Posted: 18 Oct 2006, 16:14
by Betalord
I would agree too. That is something we already do, we have a spam-box subforum (visible to forum mods only) where we move very inappropriate threads.
Posted: 18 Oct 2006, 18:39
by j5mello
i think cup is arguing that ur credentials for threads entering that box need to be changed to include certain ones.
While the raneti one needed to die quickly i can see that the tN one serves a purpose (admittedly its turned into a F***ing flame war but, meh that happens 70% of the time) and indeed should be locked but not deleted. Having it visible so people can understand the situation is a valid reason.
Posted: 18 Oct 2006, 19:28
by Acidd_UK
I agree, it's annoying to have ppl talking about threads that are no longer visible.
Posted: 19 Oct 2006, 01:37
by Neddie
I simply don't think threads should be deleted or hidden. If something goes wrong, they are a monument - an element of history which may aid future posters in avoiding the same mistakes.
Posted: 19 Oct 2006, 04:11
by FireCrack
^I fully agree here, unless a thread is an advert spam or whatnot there's no reason to delete it.
Posted: 19 Oct 2006, 04:35
by PauloMorfeo
And that is why i am glad you are not an administrator or moderator.
Posted: 19 Oct 2006, 05:47
by Neddie
Why? How does covering discussion up help anybody?
Posted: 19 Oct 2006, 05:49
by Lolsquad_Steven
Min3mat wrote:NO, otherwise the lulz would be lost...FOREVER :O
c|={D-|-<
Posted: 19 Oct 2006, 08:32
by Drone_Fragger
:O
'Tis Lolsquad with a hat! \o/
Posted: 19 Oct 2006, 09:38
by NOiZE
IMO threads shouldn't get removed too quickly.
Posted: 19 Oct 2006, 11:09
by PicassoCT
How about the Ability for the Mods to set auto-shrink to offenders Textsize, so all there previous posts and following posts get smaller and smaller....
Posted: 19 Oct 2006, 17:43
by SwiftSpear
neddiedrow wrote:Why? How does covering discussion up help anybody?
If it's a flame against someone it stops the flame war.
Posted: 19 Oct 2006, 18:13
by FireCrack
^and closing it would do that as well.
Posted: 19 Oct 2006, 18:20
by iamacup
the point im making is, i can start a thread that goes 'i hate betalord' or 'LOL AF IS CRAP'
and i know it wont get deleted ever.
why does a thread thats just full of flame need to survive, anyway it was just my thought
garrys mod forums are the best. this is what they do.
Posted: 19 Oct 2006, 18:30
by rattle
Isn't it more efficient to delete the people instead and keep the threads for funnies?