Locked Threads?

[FishNChips]

2 questions:

First the General : How and why do threads get locked?

Second, the specific : How and Why was the "why men leave their wives" thread locked? At some point over the weekend I was requested to turn in my testicles - I thought I'd respond that I'd prefer to keep them, but the thread is locked. What did I miss?

FishNChips

[jakethebake]

What's the over/under on how many replies before this one gets locked?

[FishNChips]

I don't care if it gets locked, I'd just like to understand WHY?

F&C

[jakethebake]

Dynasty or wacki lock them. i thought hey were only locking threads that were reposts of existing threads or were basically just started to slam another poster. I'm not sure why that one would have been locked. it seemed like a pretty good thread.

[wacki]

1) REPEAT POSTS
2) advertisements -banned
3) threads about other posters (i.e. XXXXX is a [censored] face thread)

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
Second, the specific : How and Why was the "why men leave their wives" thread locked?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know but I'm tempted to unlock it.

[IndieMatty]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Second, the specific : How and Why was the "why men leave their wives" thread locked?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know but I'm tempted to unlock it.

[/ QUOTE ]

BATTLE OF THE MODS!

[FishNChips]

Thanks Wacki...
I just wish it had been locked before my testicles were taken...

F&C

[wacki]

This is why I prefer leaving a final note in threads that aren't obvious to help explain why they are locked and avoid situations like this. Still, this isn't my website so I'm not going to question the powers that be.

[wacki]

I just PM'ed Dynasty.

[FishNChips]

perhaps Dynasty could clarify? I thought it was an interesting thread.

[wacki]

Agreed, the how young will you go thread was also interesting. My favorite post in that thread was "youngest age you can go = (your age/2 +7)".

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
1) REPEAT POSTS
2) advertisements -banned
3) threads about other posters (i.e. XXXXX is a [censored] face thread)

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what I thought. And as I recall, Dynasty went out of his way say those would be the only ones he'd lock. But we do seem to be seeing quite a few locked that don't meet those criteria.

[raisethatmofo]

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
someone deleted my "how young will you go " thread ? Why ? I liked the old OOT.

[/ QUOTE ]

was it deleted entirely? not just locked? wtf? this is getting ridiculous. /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[theredwave]

[ QUOTE ]
I liked the old OOT.

[/ QUOTE ]

You registered on June 7th, old OOT was 5 days ago. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
I just PM'ed Dynasty.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't lock it.

In a recent PM conversation with Mat, I was told Mat preferred to see threads deleted without any comment rather than locked (with or without comment). So, I'm no longer locking threads. I'm only deleting them with the same criteria I've stated before.

[James Boston]

[ QUOTE ]
My favorite post in that thread was "youngest age you can go = (your age/2 +7)".

[/ QUOTE ]

I posted that, and now I can't find it when I view all my past posts. Why?

[TimM]

[ QUOTE ]
1) REPEAT POSTS

[/ QUOTE ]

So we can have 100 threads about Big Steve being gay as long as they each have a slightly different take on it, but we can't have two threads about sex with younger women?

But seriously, I think if deletion is the only option, using the criteria that was meant for locking is too liberal.

[mason55]

[ QUOTE ]

So we can have 100 threads about Big Steve being gay as long as they each have a slightly different take on it

[/ QUOTE ]

http://scottwax.com/rice/ratedr/attention%20whore3.jpg

[2+2 wannabe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

So we can have 100 threads about Big Steve being gay as long as they each have a slightly different take on it

[/ QUOTE ]

http://scottwax.com/rice/ratedr/attention%20whore3.jpg

[/ QUOTE ]

***THIS THREAD HAS BEEN LOCKED***

[billyjex]

I gotta say, sounds very lame.

I don't think this was what people wanted when they wanted moderators.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
I gotta say, sounds very lame.

I don't think this was what people wanted when they wanted moderators.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find this very funny. What did people expect when they asked for mods? I was against any mods beyond what mat was already doing, but I'm actually very pleased so far. Better than I expected.

[LALDAAS]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I liked the old OOT.

[/ QUOTE ]

You registered on June 7th, old OOT was 5 days ago. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

PWNED!

[MelK]

[ QUOTE ]
1) REPEAT POSTS
2) advertisements -banned
3) threads about other posters (i.e. XXXXX is a [censored] face thread)

[/ QUOTE ]

I know of at least one thread about thread deletion policy that was deleted (at a time when no other threads on the topic were on the front page). That deletion did not fit the stated policy listed above.

[Mat Sklansky]

That criteria is what Dynasty feels comfortable with; it's not mine. Right now, threads which are centered around the degradation of women are coming down. I think it makes us, Two Plus Two, look bad. A lot gets by me, which is why the deletions seem inconsistent. Bottom line: if I find a thread where the posts are predominantly bigoted or sexist, I'll most likely delete. In the future, once all the server issues are figured out, I'll want oot split even further. At that point we can go back to including a virtually unmoderated oot forum.

Mat

[ripdog]

[ QUOTE ]
That criteria is what Dynasty feels comfortable with; it's not mine. Right now, threads which are centered around the degradation of women are coming down. I think it makes us, Two Plus Two, look bad. A lot gets by me, which is why the deletions seem inconsistent. Bottom line: if I find a thread where the posts are predominantly bigoted or sexist, I'll most likely delete. In the future, once all the server issues are figured out, I'll want oot split even further. At that point we can go back to including a virtually unmoderated oot forum.

Mat

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the explantion I was hoping for. Hopefully this takes place sooner than later.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll want oot split even further. At that point we can go back to including a virtually unmoderated oot forum.
Mat

[/ QUOTE ]
This is the explantion I was hoping for. Hopefully this takes place sooner than later.

[/ QUOTE ]

I kind of worry about this. One great thing about 00t is that there's so much good stuff here. I don't necessarily want to have to look in 8 different forums for hot chick threads, sports, quitting smoking, cars, or whatever. It seems like 00t serves its purpose fine w/o that.

[ripdog]

[ QUOTE ]
I kind of worry about this. One great thing about 00t is that there's so much good stuff here. I don't necessarily want to have to look in 8 different forums for hot chick threads, sports, quitting smoking, cars, or whatever. It seems like 00t serves its purpose fine w/o that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't post much about sports here because it gets buried so fast by "what's the best porn?" and similar garbage. If you want to generate any interest in a thread here, it has to have a title like "Lindsay Lohan and other pigs", which is good enough to get it deleted even if the responses are all tasteful and well thought out. No, OOT need a forum dedicated to threads that might deeply offend a lot of posters on this site. As it is now, all they have to do is whine about offensive posts and the thread gets sent to 2+2's equivalent of Guantanamo Bay. The sickos need a safe haven here.