h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I don't think this has anything to do with N3. Jim Lynn can take care of that any time he wants.

I suspect that most of us in this thread and who are subscribed to this forum rarely get to see the sort of childishness and petty bickering that goes on between supposed adults on parts of this site, and I suspect the people involved in said bickering aren't even aware of this forum. Every now and again though some of it surfaces and we get a tiny glimpse of what the Eds have to deal with every day and the moderation problems that are taking up far too much of their time these days, to h2g2's detriment.

Do you want to deal with this sort of thing F98406?thread=1867234&skip=6740&show=20 on a daily basis, when you were taken on to help build the Guide to Life, the Universe and Everything?

I think it is a valuable tool if used properly, the problem is
















This conversation has been closed. We may use this for legal reasons such as a defamation or election, because the conversation has become unruly or possibly to divert conversations to relevant discussions elsewhere. The h2g2 Editors will also have the facility to reopen closed conversations if there is a clear benefit to do so.

I'd like a definition of "unruly" conversations. As to profanity stuff; well, the willy thread is quite obviously devoted to the joys or otherwise of our male members; however, there is massive topic drift. We have do be poked often & told "Oy! We are supposed to be discussing penii!"

However, in over 3000 posts & daily acitivity, i don't think anyone has ever been offensive in my opinion. Explicit, definitely, offensive, no.

zdt

"...the joys or otherwise of our male members; ... We have do be poked often..."

Sorry, I couldn't let that pass...

zdt

The announcement was fairly explicit. The title had me worried that old conversations would be just deleted because they were old. That would not be fair - I have some old conversations that I sometimes refer to, which haven't been posted to for yonks.

Although that is slightly more difficult these day .... When are we going to be able to search conversations again?

I should make it clear that closing a conversation doesn't mean deleting it. Closed conversations will still be visible unless they have to be hidden for moderation reasons (defamation, contempt of court, etc.). You just won't be able to reply to the closed conversation.

'We may use this for legal reasons such as a defamation or election.'

As you guys know I've always abidded by election rules so I'll be watching out for misuse of this function under election situation, just because I am the H2G2 who is most likely to take part in and said elections.

My lips will remained sealed during the course of elections. I have other outlets available for that.

interesting.
I remeber raising this as an idea a while ago (can't find the convo I did it in though, either feedback or one of the DW threads) and was told this was already possible, just that it wasn't done.

Ah well. I wonder if all this activity means that at some point soon I might get the functionality to remove myself from other peoples friends lists.

Actually DD, I'd think it'd be quite useful during an election...

If we were being herded into a certain zone of the site to discuss politics during an election then it'd make a lot of sense for existing political discussions elsewhere on the site to be temporarily locked for the duration - at least that way the italics wouldn't have to spend their time monitoring those conversations to make sure there weren't any problems developing.

Something to bear in mind, about all of the things we announced yesterday - these tools have been given to us so that we're using our time to the best advantage. We're not going to be wading through pages and pages of conversations looking for opportunities to pounce.

But, for example, during an election (such as the local elections that will be taking place next month in the UK), we have a legal obligation to ensure that we are not hijacked by pressure groups or used for campaigning. If we receive an alert to a busy conversation that appears to be heading in that direction, we would either have to manually yikes each and every conversation or junk the entire thread. Now, we have to option of locking the conversation (and posting a message to inform contributors that we've done this), which then means we're not chasing our tails trying to remove existing messages and new messages at the same time.

Once we've been through the conversation and taken whatever action might be necessary, we then have the option of reopening the conversation, if we feel it's worthwhile. The same goes for conversations where things have descended into the 'he said' / 'she said' arguments that occasionally cause disruptions to the site. Think of it as an enforced 'Time Out' option, if you like.

You'll be able to tell where a thread has been locked because it will carry a message at the top telling you so.

We can't guarantee that some conversations may have to be locked if they pose a threat to the servers - this was one of the reasons the feature was originally developed. But for the moment we're happy for existing conversations to run. If we feel there's a genuine need to close a conversation because of size, we will create a new conversation and link to it from the old one, so that there's some sense of continuity.

JImster

Like I said earlier, what would be *really* nice is allowing the likes of us to lock and unlock our own messages or journal threads. this way, we could discourage unwanted attention.

"But for the moment we're happy for existing conversations to run."

so this isn't all a ploy to close 3N?

"If we feel there's a genuine need to close a conversation because of size, we will create a new conversation and link to it from the old one, so that there's some sense of continuity."

wait a minute...(<--read as <eyesnarrowedinsuspicion&gt

Is this part of the advance plans to increase capacity for the world cup and the expected massive increase in traffic on the sports boards?
If so then frankly I would have to say it's hardly a solution,penalise hootoo which has run relatively well without the need for this action to be instigated before now. I know it's used in other boards but other boards have specific uses which get abused.I've seen very little in h2 that warrants the closing of conversations, Trolls and WUM's soon get short shrift from hootoo'ers and usually fail in their efforts to cause serious problems.
be an interesting one to watch this, see what type of convos get closed.

ST

My major concern is that while I obviously do not post any of political believes on here during an election campaign anything that I type about what I'm up to etc could possibly be taken by some people to be of a political nature even if that was not the intention. Who highlights such convos? I'd like to know who makes the decision to lock such convo's? Is there a right to appeal? What if someone is deliberately applying to lock all conversations of any researcher who may have a political background out of malicious intent?

I agree that the principle is good, I'm worried that in certain istances it may get abused which is what I was inferring to earlier.

"What if someone is deliberately applying to lock all conversations of any researcher who may have a political background out of malicious intent"

That'd involve locking every conversation once you've (or some mysterious unknown theoretical entity ) posted to it.

Can't see that being practically possible anyway! - It'd be far less trouble for the italics to just put you (or some mysterious...etc...) into pre-mod for the duration - and that, they could have already done if they'd wanted to!


I'd suspect the thing would be used (for instance) to shut down conversations like this one F135418?thread=2479702 for the duration of an election period if the PTB were limiting conversations to a given forum or site.

yes, I've been waiting for the email as soon as I read the first post of this thread

From what I've seen of this function on other boards (PoV uses it), you won't get an e-mail personally just because you posted the first post in the conversation - all that'll happen is that the last post on the conversation will be by the italics, explaining what they've done, the 'reply' buttons will all disappear and a message saying "this thread has been closed" at the top of the page.

(And no, you can't beat the system by manually entering the AddThread?inreplyto=xxxxx URL into your browser bar - I've already tried it )

the thought never crossed my mind !

Do you get the feeling Jim Lynn understands his customers far too well?