Moderating Question

[DaShi]

Is it proper for a moderator to make a contribution to a thread then close it in his next post so that no one can respond to his contribution? By contribution, I mean honest to goodness contribution. Not "this thread is spam" or anything, but a post that seems to acknowledge the thread as something worth discussing. Then he oddly closes it with no reason. Reeks of bad form to me. What do others think?

[Skanky Burns]

Example?

[DaShi]

Oh, I don't want to name names, but I'm sure you are all understanding who I am talking about.

[Urban Ranger]

Do you have a point Mr DaShi, or are you doing drive-by posting again?

[Az]

The best mod-trolling performance in quite some time.

[Asher]

Although it was a tad bit unoriginal, given my recent accusations of UR performing troll-and-runs...

[Asher]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
Example?

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=104570

Guess whose thread it was, too.

He posted a response, then posted another post consisting entirely of "." and then locked it.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Asher
Although it was a tad bit unoriginal, given my recent accusations of UR performing troll-and-runs...

Sorry, Mr Milford, but I do not have the time and inclination to deal with your sophomoric antics. It's not the first time you keep posting inane messages in discussions that have been clearly decided so you could make the empty claim that the other side ran from you. It's not the first time I pointed that out, either.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Asher
He posted a response, then posted another post consisting entirely of "." and then locked it.

It was a "look-at-me" thread that became a spamfest.

Do you have any questions on why it was locked?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Sorry, Mr Milford, but I do not have the time and inclination to deal with your sophomoric antics. It's not the first time you keep posting inane messages in discussions that have been clearly decided so you could make the empty claim that the other side ran from you. It's not the first time I pointed that out, either.

Give me a break, UR. You're not fooling anyone, you're not the intellectual you think you are.

Everyone knows you abandon threads as soon as you start getting your ass kicked, but then you turn it around and claim everyone else does it.

You are correct in that the discussions are always "clearly decided", but the problem is they're not in your favor. So you ignore the thread rather than admit you were wrong.

So kudos to you for being able to admit those discussions were clearly decided.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
It was a "look-at-me" thread that became a spamfest.

Do you have any questions on why it was locked?

You seem to be confused as to what the problem is.

The problem is you participating in a thread, then promptly locking it without explanation afterwards. Why do you have to be such a moron about such things?

As for it turning into a "spam" thread, it was a Philosophers versus Scientists thread. That's as much a spam thread as any sports thread regarding rivalries, a pro-life vs. pro-choice thread, etc. Not to mention several posters were enlightened into more of how the North American universities work.

Just because you found it boring doesn't mean you had to close it -- who was being harmed in having it open? You paint a picture like it was a rapidly-growing spam thread when the thread was fairly inactive by the time you closed it, and contained lots of valuable information to non-North Americans.

To be frank you should make it less obvious who you have it out for -- there are at least a dozen more threads on the first two pages that are easily considered more of spam than that thread was, but the fact is you don't have the intelligence to be a decent moderator. You don't even know enough not to contribute to a thread right before you lock it, and also that you should post an explanation for why you did what you did (See CivFanatic's "Moderator Action" policy).

You, and the Apolyton Administration, should both be terribly embarrassed that I have to point this out to you.

[Frozzy]

Quite frankly I don't see how that was blatant spam, combined with the fact the OTF doesn't increase your post count.

I think it was a perfectly legitimate thread, personally.

[mrmitchell]

Will certain posters and maybe a mod, or maybe not, just

STUFF IT

No one other than you, certain posters and maybe a mod, or maybe not, really gives a rat's ass and everything would go off better if you all just had each and every one of each other on ignore (and then didn't post "Hm I wonder how stupid this is" comments in their thread if you do indeed really have them on ignore.)

[Asher]

Perhaps with time you'll realize that you don't have to read threads that don't interest you.

It will be a grand day, that.

[mrmitchell]

Perhaps with time you'll realize that you don't have to read threads that don't interest you.

And how was I supposed to know that, from the title alone, this thread would be about the whole gang of feuding frckers? Who knows, it might've been a legitimate question and it might've recieved a legitimate response. Maybe you, in your infinite wisdom, might be able to foretell the future, and predict a thread's relevancy without opening it, but I have not yet advanced to that plane of thought, O Great Asher.