DVD Talk
The one and only "Why was this thread closed?" thread [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : The one and only "Why was this thread closed?" thread


Groucho
12-21-09, 11:47 AM
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/367098-clash-titans-remake.html

Why?

Adam Tyner
12-21-09, 01:18 PM
I checked the log to see who closed the thread, and...um, apparently it was me on Dec. 18th. If I had a reason why, I guess I've forgotten. (Maybe I did it by accident? Is that even possible? I don't fiddle with threads in forums I don't moderate.) It's been reopened. Sorry about that. I'm pretty mystified.

pilot
12-21-09, 02:16 PM
you're fired.
turn in your name badge and report to security immediately.

Chrisedge
12-21-09, 05:58 PM
How about the target gun thread I posted in Vegas Forum? It was deleted, yet the gory deer thread stays open...

Lemmy
12-22-09, 09:10 AM
How about the target gun thread I posted in Vegas Forum? It was deleted, yet the gory deer thread stays open...

Agreed. Whether you hunt or not, the gore is disgustingly displayed. It's in such poor taste that I can't imagine why it's allowed to remain open. I eat meat, though I don't hunt, and I have no pity for the animals I eat. And I know where/how my food arrives at my table. But that thread is disgusting, and those who are contributing pics are just....disturbed.

JohnSlider
12-22-09, 07:37 PM
I also wonder why the deer thread has not been closed.

Dan
12-22-09, 11:24 PM
Has anyone actually hit the "report" icon on any of the offending posts?

Lemmy
12-23-09, 01:56 PM
Has anyone actually hit the "report" icon on any of the offending posts?

Consider it done.

dx23
12-23-09, 04:09 PM
I know this thread (http://forum.dvdtalk.com/store-forum/566714-bestbuy-these-days.html ) was closed because the OP requested it after insulting other members, but I think that is a stupid rule. I don't think that just because other members have a different opinion than him, the OP should take the ball and go home.

The Antipodean
12-23-09, 04:09 PM
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/367098-clash-titans-remake.html

Why?

I was wondering about that one too. I figured it was the usual anti-Kraken bias by "the man" that keeps creeping in.

Deftones
12-23-09, 05:10 PM
I know this thread (http://forum.dvdtalk.com/store-forum/566714-bestbuy-these-days.html ) was closed because the OP requested it after insulting other members, but I think that is a stupid rule. I don't think that just because other members have a different opinion than him, the OP should take the ball and go home.

i mean, seriously, the guy can't add!

Trevor
12-25-09, 03:17 PM
I know this thread (http://forum.dvdtalk.com/store-forum/566714-bestbuy-these-days.html ) was closed because the OP requested it after insulting other members, but I think that is a stupid rule. I don't think that just because other members have a different opinion than him, the OP should take the ball and go home.

Yeah, what the heck is up with that?

The OP should not 'own' a thread or have any more rights in it than any other DVDTalker.

DVD Polizei
12-26-09, 02:27 AM
Has anyone actually hit the "report" icon on any of the offending posts?

I did on several occasions. I thought it was to make the forum load faster.

My apologies to those who got banned.

dx23
01-19-10, 11:12 PM
Why this was closed? It was becoming the thread of the year.

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/other-talk/567961-can-someone-photoshop-skills-help-fix-pic-please-4.html

Groucho
01-19-10, 11:32 PM
Why this was closed? It was becoming the thread of the year.

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/other-talk/567961-can-someone-photoshop-skills-help-fix-pic-please-4.htmlI suspect it was at the request of the OP.

Travis McClain
01-20-10, 11:11 PM
While we're on the subject of closing threads, I recently bumped a nearly three year old thread of Target sale prices in the Hot Deals forum. I did so because I recently bought the Target exclusive Casino Royale that went on sale that week and thought it the most appropriate place to ask a question about the ISBN for the product, as I did not get the packaging with my book. I made sure to post, in bold font, that this was not a current thread thinking that would dispel the inevitable, "Dammit! I thought Speedy was back!" remarks that accompany every such bump. I was chastised anyway. One poster even remarked something to the effect of how, for every two failures to use the search feature there's an instance of someone using it when they shouldn't have.

I suppose I should have instead found a thread about the title in the DVD section, but my reasoning for the hot deals was simply that I sought ISBN information, and I know that the regular readers of that section are generally more conscious of such information. (I mean, hell, we've even had side conversations emerge over what the SKU number was for a specific store exclusive on occasion.)

In any event, that thread is now closed...in large part due to a spattering of entirely unnecessary remarks such as the ones espousing confusion and anger at my bump. I'm fine with the closure, actually, and it got me to thinking. I move that every Hot Deals thread started by Speedy be closed. Let it be a monument to his retirement, ending these unpopular bumps (though I still believe I had a legitimate, if dubious, reason).

story
01-20-10, 11:55 PM
What you're talking about, MinLShaw, is a real issue on this board when it comes to the search feature. It's either, "Why didn't you use the search function?!" or it's "Why did you bump this thread?!" It's frustrating.

Trevor
01-21-10, 11:10 AM
I suspect it was at the request of the OP.
I never understand why that matters. In my opinion, the OP of a thread is no more important than anyone else who participates in it. Closing threads is stupid. Punish the one or two people who break the rules.
While we're on the subject of closing threads, I recently bumped a nearly three year old thread of Target sale prices in the Hot Deals forum. I did so because I recently bought the Target exclusive Casino Royale that went on sale that week and thought it the most appropriate place to ask a question about the ISBN for the product, as I did not get the packaging with my book. I made sure to post, in bold font, that this was not a current thread thinking that would dispel the inevitable, "Dammit! I thought Speedy was back!" remarks that accompany every such bump. I was chastised anyway. One poster even remarked something to the effect of how, for every two failures to use the search feature there's an instance of someone using it when they shouldn't have.

I suppose I should have instead found a thread about the title in the DVD section, but my reasoning for the hot deals was simply that I sought ISBN information, and I know that the regular readers of that section are generally more conscious of such information. (I mean, hell, we've even had side conversations emerge over what the SKU number was for a specific store exclusive on occasion.)

In any event, that thread is now closed...in large part due to a spattering of entirely unnecessary remarks such as the ones espousing confusion and anger at my bump. I'm fine with the closure, actually, and it got me to thinking. I move that every Hot Deals thread started by Speedy be closed. Let it be a monument to his retirement, ending these unpopular bumps (though I still believe I had a legitimate, if dubious, reason).
I think most of the people questioning the thread bump were just joking, and if they weren't, they need to get over it. I thought it was a fine bump.

JohnSlider
01-22-10, 12:03 PM
I suspect it was at the request of the OP.

I doubt it. It will be a sad, sad day when The Infidel can't take a joke.

story
01-22-10, 12:24 PM
Really? I thought it was pretty mean-spirited and unnecessary.

JohnSlider
01-22-10, 12:34 PM
Mean spirited? Towards the guy who did Drink Man Comics? I doubt he took much offense.

LurkerDan
01-26-10, 05:58 PM
I doubt it. It will be a sad, sad day when The Infidel can't take a joke.

He seemed pretty annoyed in that thread, and didn't seem like someone who was joking. I suspected that he requested the thread closed as well, based on how he was responding to people in the thread.

But I think dogmatica was responding to something else (the search vs why did you bump this comments).

Josh-da-man
01-26-10, 07:38 PM
What you're talking about, MinLShaw, is a real issue on this board when it comes to the search feature. It's either, "Why didn't you use the search function?!" or it's "Why did you bump this thread?!" It's frustrating.

I'd say that it's okay to start a new thread as long as there isn't an active discussion currently going on.

Personally, I find it a little irritating when someone bumps a thread over a year or so old to ask something only tangentially related to the discussion at hand.

Every message board has its own temperament, some boards will expect all "Star Wars" discussion to go into a "one and only Star Wars" thread that might stretch over hundreds pages. Which, in my mind, makes it next to impossible to get anything out of it.

Trevor
01-26-10, 11:32 PM
I much prefer bumps of old threads than starting new ones. A bump of an old thread will often inspire new discussion and interest in the subject, and having all the old conversation right there is only a benefit.

Starting a new thread will just lead to people asking the same old questions that were answered in the old threads.

benedict
01-27-10, 04:12 AM
[...]Every message board has its own temperament, some boards will expect all "Star Wars" discussion to go into a "one and only Star Wars" thread that might stretch over hundreds pages. Which, in my mind, makes it next to impossible to get anything out of it.Ideally, when an ongoing thread here exceeds a certain number of posts, currently around 600 (I think - but it may be 800, I forget what was agreed), the idea is to start a new part two/three/whatever and ask a mod to close the older one.

Trevor
01-27-10, 07:49 AM
^ I think it is 900.

Numanoid
01-28-10, 02:03 AM
Mean spirited? Towards the guy who did Drink Man Comics? I doubt he took much offense.I can speak from personal experience that some people here can dish it out but not take it.

dx23
01-28-10, 02:01 PM
Why is the "JD Salinger" is dead thread I created in Other being deleted?

X
01-28-10, 02:03 PM
The first thread you started was merged with the existing one in Book Talk. The second one you started was merged with the existing one in Book Talk.

dx23
01-28-10, 02:06 PM
The first thread you started was merged with the existing one in Book Talk. The second one you started was merged with the existing one in Book Talk.

Thanks. didn't see it there when I checked.

LurkerDan
01-28-10, 02:28 PM
Seems pretty silly that we can't talk about JD Salinger in Otter. :shrug:

dx23
03-25-10, 04:33 PM
Could someone explain me why this thread was closed?

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/blu-ray-bargains/570978-toys-r-us-bd-dvd-prices-3-21-3-27-a-13.html

By explanation, I mean, why in the blue hell does someone here think that using to legally distributed coupons by Disney is fraud or cheating? Just because they closed the thread in another forum, doesn't mean that they are right and we are wrong. Toys R Us will get reimbursement for both coupons and they don't have the policy that Target and Best Buy have of only accepting one coupon.

I went to Toys R Us twice already and the coupons scan without a hitch. The clerks didn't make any fuzz. I went to the thread above to ask something related to the scarcity of the Blu-ray packaging at that specific store and now I don't know if opening a new Toys R Us thread will get me suspended.

By the way, I'm not trying to put pilot on the spot here. He has been a great mod in this forum, but I don't see why people who used the 2 coupons are now called cheaters or think that this is fraudulent behavior.

pilot
03-26-10, 01:13 PM
Could someone explain me why this thread was closed?

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/blu-ray-bargains/570978-toys-r-us-bd-dvd-prices-3-21-3-27-a-13.html

By explanation, I mean, why in the blue hell does someone here think that using to legally distributed coupons by Disney is fraud or cheating? Just because they closed the thread in another forum, doesn't mean that they are right and we are wrong. Toys R Us will get reimbursement for both coupons and they don't have the policy that Target and Best Buy have of only accepting one coupon.

I went to Toys R Us twice already and the coupons scan without a hitch. The clerks didn't make any fuzz. I went to the thread above to ask something related to the scarcity of the Blu-ray packaging at that specific store and now I don't know if opening a new Toys R Us thread will get me suspended.

By the way, I'm not trying to put pilot on the spot here. He has been a great mod in this forum, but I don't see why people who used the 2 coupons are now called cheaters or think that this is fraudulent behavior.
The reason I closed it mostly was because I was annoyed at the fact of people who constantly feel the need to while maybe not illegal, but maybe somewhat unethically - by either knowingly or unknowingly use multiple coupons on one purchase, who the post about it here, and then have to sort through the posts of those who call those posters out and having people squabble with each other about doing it, which then requires me to keep going in and editing and deleting posts over and over again.

I was hoping that it would possibly make a statement, albeit maybe a small one which would stop it from reoccurring.

Heat
04-06-10, 01:16 PM
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/tech-talk/571941-want-move-all-my-dvds-digital-what-best-software-manage.html

People can't ask about software to copy DVDs? Copying a DVD is legal (fair use), breaking copy protection is not legal (digital rights management act). There are DVDs without copy protection which can be legally ripped to a hard drive, if you had the right software. Asking about the software is not allowed?

Lemmy
04-06-10, 02:57 PM
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/tech-talk/571941-want-move-all-my-dvds-digital-what-best-software-manage.html

People can't ask about software to copy DVDs? Copying a DVD is legal (fair use), breaking copy protection is not legal (digital rights management act). There are DVDs without copy protection which can be legally ripped to a hard drive, if you had the right software. Asking about the software is not allowed?

-popcorn-

mkdevo
04-06-10, 03:50 PM
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/tech-talk/571941-want-move-all-my-dvds-digital-what-best-software-manage.html

People can't ask about software to copy DVDs? Copying a DVD is legal (fair use), breaking copy protection is not legal (digital rights management act). There are DVDs without copy protection which can be legally ripped to a hard drive, if you had the right software. Asking about the software is not allowed?

He wasn't even asking about software to copy DVDs, he was asking about media management software, which makes the lock even more ridiculous. Was the post even read before the thread was locked? It certainly doesn't look like Trevor read it before making his post..

X
04-06-10, 03:53 PM
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/tech-talk/571941-want-move-all-my-dvds-digital-what-best-software-manage.html

People can't ask about software to copy DVDs? Copying a DVD is legal (fair use), breaking copy protection is not legal (digital rights management act). There are DVDs without copy protection which can be legally ripped to a hard drive, if you had the right software. Asking about the software is not allowed?You may have missed the years of discussion we've had about the DMCA.

And we're not going to help in those endeavors as stated in the same forum that thread was posted. http://forum.dvdtalk.com/tech-talk/401647-requesting-providing-help-copying-copyrighted-material.html

Trevor
04-08-10, 11:07 AM
It certainly doesn't look like Trevor read it before making his post..
:hscratch: No, I read it. And because I've been here for more than a week I knew it wasn't going to be allowed, and thought I'd let the OP know before anyone reported it or deleted the thread.

Travis McClain
04-27-10, 04:30 PM
Okay, so I wasn't terribly surprised that "blu ray is Stupid (http://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk/572917-blu-ray-stupid.html)" was closed. But I would take umbrage with the thread closing remarks by nemein:

"Mod note: DVDtalk is not really the place for format wars. If you want to get into those types of discussions I'm sure there are plenty of other places out there that will accommodate you."

Not to be too much of a malcontent, but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't take long to find evidence of format war disputes going on amongst our little community. In fact, one of the more interesting threads I've seen is in the DVD & Home Theater Gear sub-forum, questioning whether there is a double-standard among fans who embrace HD, but shun 3D. There are legitimate questions being asked there, and while I certainly agree that none were raised in "blu ray is Stupid," I definitely think the idea that this community doesn't have, or for some reason isn't the appropriate venue for, those debates is categorically wrong.

benedict
04-28-10, 04:23 AM
[...]I definitely think the idea that this community doesn't have, or for some reason isn't the appropriate venue for, those debates is categorically wrong.You seem to be arguing against something that nemein didn't quite say i.e. "these types of discussions" could more charitably be construed as referring to intemperate, vitriolic, warlike ones.

Although gratuitous "warlike" format bashing clearly is unwelcome, I would expect informed, mature debate to be another thing entirely.

This said, a major problem when endeavouring to keep the forums free of petty bickering is that there are often those who will drag a constructive debate right down into the gutter.

Consequently, there comes a point when an adminstrative decision has to be made that, based on previous warnings to "play nice" constantly being ignored, particular topics are verboten.

Just my two pennies. I don't tend to look into such threads/forums and doubtless nemein will clarify whether a decision has been made on format discussions in particular or just the ill-tempered ones.

Travis McClain
04-28-10, 04:35 AM
You seem to be arguing against something that nemein didn't quite say i.e. "these types of discussions" could more charitably be construed as referring to intemperate, vitriolic, warlike ones.

Although gratuitous "warlike" format bashing clearly is unwelcome, I would expect informed, mature debate to be another thing entirely.

This said, a major problem when endeavouring to keep the forums free of petty bickering is that there are often those who will drag a constructive debate right down into the gutter.

Consequently, there comes a point when an adminstrative decision has to be made that, based on previous warnings to "play nice" constantly being ignored, particular topics are verboten.

Just my two pennies. I don't tend to look into such threads/forums and doubtless nemein will clarify whether a decision has been made on format discussions in particular or just the ill-tempered ones.

Don't get me wrong; there was nothing of any value to be found in the cited closed thread and I think anyone who read the initial post was amazed how long it stayed open before being locked. I'm certainly "on board" with the spirit of nemein's reasoning, and your reiteration of it...but I still think using a phrase like "DVDtalk is not really the place for format wars" is inaccurate.

nemein
04-28-10, 11:13 PM
As has been mentioned there are threads around in which varying views on formats are being discussed... I wouldn't call those "format wars" myself. To me a "format war" is more akin to troll posting. Make sense? Apologies for any confusion. If you look at the time my post was made, 2315, that was the quickest phrasing I could think of to shut down the thread in a way that would hopefully kill that type of thread/conversation ;)

covenant
04-30-10, 04:21 PM
Add "HICK by Andrea Portes (my wife)" from the movie section to this thread.

Groucho
04-30-10, 04:23 PM
Add "HICK by Andrea Portes (my wife)" from the movie section to this thread.That one was at the request of the OP.

Trevor
04-30-10, 04:39 PM
That one was at the request of the OP.

Complete bullcrap reason in my opinion.

The OP should have no more 'rights' to a thread than you or I.

If a post was offensive, remove the post and punish the wrongdoer, don't delete the entire thread.

covenant
04-30-10, 04:54 PM
That one was at the request of the OP.

Oh, I know why it was deleted, I just wanted it added to the thread as another example.

Groucho
04-30-10, 05:46 PM
Complete bullcrap reason in my opinion.

The OP should have no more 'rights' to a thread than you or I.

If a post was offensive, remove the post and punish the wrongdoer, don't delete the entire thread.What's funny is that there was nothing offensive at all. A publicity photo of a published author was posted, and somehow that triggered the complaint.

Trevor
04-30-10, 06:21 PM
What's funny is that there was nothing offensive at all. A publicity photo of a published author was posted, and somehow that triggered the complaint.

I think I caught most of the thread before it was deleted, partially through the email notifications. It did look fairly innocent to me, and I theorize that the OP didn't really know what he was starting, wandered over and took his first look at Otter, and panicked, seeing where things may have gone.

Crow331
04-30-10, 06:24 PM
delete

Trevor
04-30-10, 06:42 PM
Actually, it isn't a publicity photo at all and Covenant likes to change the story on where he got the photo to suit his side of it. First he said he got it from myspace then in a private message he tells me he got it from a hubpages blog, then in a 3rd email he tells me he found it in a "google search". Basically Covenant is full of Sh!t

And I originally reported the post itself to be deleted, not the thread, but after I saw that thread basically going to crap I asked for it to be deleted. I'll post again when we actually have casting news and hopefully some dumb ass won't find it necessary to ask for pics of my wife and another dumb ass won't oblige him for a reason that is pointless and adds nothing to the thread except to give Covenant something to think about when he heads to the bathroom on yet another Saturday night he spends alone.

That last part was pretty uncalled for Crow. Somebody is going to do similar things in almost every thread here, we just have to ignore it or have fun with it.

And not really knowing the particulars, the three different answers given up there could all easily be correct on his part, and not anyone being full of crap. I googled, I googled and saw it on site x, I googled and saw it on site y. All correct even if I omit the 'i googled' sometimes.

Crow331
04-30-10, 06:53 PM
delete

WallyOPD
04-30-10, 07:08 PM
A google search for her name brings up her myspace page as the very first hit. :shrug:

Hokeyboy
04-30-10, 07:13 PM
As the "dumbass who asked for pics of your wife", I must say that "pics?" replies to any time a poster mentions a female acquaintance -- wife, gf, coworker, sister, daughter, etc. -- are practically a way of life over here. It's harmless. And believe you me, compared to the rest of the Internet we're practically Shecky Greene. :shrug:

dx23
04-30-10, 08:02 PM
And it isn't like your wife isn't a public figure. She is an author and apparently an actress too, so is just a nature of the business that photos are going to be around the net. And those photos clearly were not personal.

covenant
04-30-10, 09:05 PM
And it isn't like your wife isn't a public figure. She is an author and apparently an actress too, so is just a nature of the business that photos are going to be around the net. And those photos clearly were not personal.

That was exactly the point I made in a pm to Crow331.

And as to the source of the picture: The first time I googled her name and the book title as a web search I found the interview with the picture in question. Which is the img I linked in my post. I thought it may be from the book, but I wasn't sure. As it turns out the book cover is a head shot only.

To prove a point I mentioned in a pm to Crow331 that the picture in question is the first one to come up on a google image search.

I never posted anything from her myspace page, I simply mentioned in the thread and in a PM that she/he should lock down her myspace page access if she/he doesn't want people to have access to pictures of an even more personal nature than those in google images. Which I see is still wide open....-ohbfrank-

auto
05-01-10, 01:34 PM
I've gotta imagine that this thread in feedback has caused more people to google Crow's wife than the original thread.

I thought maybe she wasn't very good looking but apparently she is too hot for DVDTalk and forced the thread close.

Trevor
05-01-10, 01:39 PM
Looks like crow doesn't want to admit to eating crow. Did you get an apology Covenant?

covenant
05-01-10, 10:48 PM
Looks like crow doesn't want to admit to eating crow. Did you get an apology Covenant?

I'm not holding my breath.