Music Talk Question: Fine, guy. Here.
 

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=373364
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=486758
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=497078
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=497184

?!!

Another member asked a legitimate question: what happened to the original thread. In response to his question, the entirely unwarranted locks of the two separate, existing threads were brought to his (and everybody else's) attention.

If you're going to lecture me about handling a complaint improperly, and thus derailing a thread...you shouldn't do so by derailing the entire forum with an unnecessary "let's make a public point" thread. With all due respect, monkey see, monkey do, sir.

I did read your "explanation." Thing is, I really couldn't care less if you feel there's nothing to discuss until the album is released. If that's the case, moderate and don't participate. Whatever, no skin off my back. But if certain people here feel there is something worth discussing, and everything is running within the forum guidelines, there's absolutely no sense in going out of your way to impede their open discussion. It happened twice, no less! I was, and still am, completely baffled. Since when is there an issue with discussing an upcoming album in the music forum?

When a moderator prohibits discussion simply because he doesn't care for the topic of discussion, there's an issue worth addressing. Furthermore, if you were unhappy with the way the issue was addressed, you surely could've found a more productive and less hypocritical way of making that known.

So, you wanted a separate thread in the feedback forum...and here it is, filled to the brim with question marks. Let's hear it.

Oh, and my apologies in advance for the vague thread title, a combination of frustration and dismay.

whatever.

:up:

Thanks for starting this thread, NBT. I thought about it, but didn't have the nerve. But I did e-mail Benedict earlier this morning and addressed much of the same things you did. AFAIK, he has yet to respond.

For what it's worth, a lot of threads in the Movie subforum are similar: your Indy 4s, etc.

Hey! Where is this "fine guy" you promised??? :grunt:

Tease. :mad:

I agree 100% with the OP.

It's not about similar or duplicate threads--the reason there's so many GN'R threads in the first place is because the moderator keeps locking the old ones up because he doesn't care for the topic. Not because they've gone off-topic, or have become too long, or caused flame wars, or broken any of the forum rules or standards. None of those things. It boils down to the fact that Benedict doesn't like Axl Rose--and doesn't like anybody else even talking about him, either.

And I think that's a bunch of crap.

Benedict seems to be just keeping a lid on these so-called "update" threads.

Consider that the first thread linked is nearly five years old and despite that it appears that there hasn't been any solid updates.

http://photos3.flickr.com/5448538_702d8c6d7e_m.jpg

There. A Bea Arthur joke.
See what you made me go and do?

Having read those, I must agree, I don't see why a moderator should close a thread just because he doesn't think there's anything to discuss until the album comes out. If others wish to discuss it, and are otherwise not breaking forum rules, the discussion should continue.

Agree with LurkerDan. Seems like a pretty lame reason to close a thread.

Threads should only be closed when they violate a forum rule, and I see nothing remotely close there.

:up:

I agree 100%. To me there's really no valid reason for any of those threads to be closed.

I second.. no, third... no... whatever the sentiment.
-ringding-

Still no word from Benedict?

= J

Nope!

Wasn't the point of requesting this comment go in feedback was so a mod could address it?

Maybe he doesn't read "Fine, guy. Here" threads?

Maybe a mod should read every thread in the feedback forum, and if another mod is called out by name, they should give that mod a heads up? Dunno, just thinking out loud here.

I agree that closing those threads was pretty lame.

I agree with all of you guys saying that it was a pointless reason to close the threads. I really don't see how anyone can't agree with that point of view.

You guys shouldn't be shocked that the mod hasn't responded yet, almost a week later. I've found that many of the mods and reviewers just flat out don't respond to threads and emails sometimes when they're questioned. I don't mean that as a knock towards anyone, but it is something that I've noticed.

Since Benedict has yet to respond to the thread that he suggested be made (or the e-mail he suggested I send), I thought I'd post some more of his own words on the topic, from the GN'R concert thread, to provide a little more insight to his position:

And then, four months later, he locked up the "Open Letter from Axl Rose" thread with the following:

So, in December, people were free to "speculate further as to the unarguably much-delayed album" in a separate thread, which was "fine if it stay(ed) relatively civil."

But in March, that changed to "maybe people could. . .only expend energy on discussing this outfit's new album if/when it appears."

I don't get it.

I am not sure why limiting it to a single thread would not have been the best solution. instead you close one and another crops up and then you end up with a thread in here??

Maybe I just am not seeing it very clearly.

I would hope a decision to allow a single thread would be acceptable to the Mods.

The answer is clear: Bendict rules the music forum with an iron fist! :lol:

I've noticed this too. If they're not going to listen to feedback, then they shouldn't pretend to care about it by asking for it.

It takes time for mods to respond because they are busy with their real jobs and lives and blah blah blah. People like us have time to check our email multiple times a day unlike them.

That's fine, but this thread's been kicking around for a week.

I'm pretty sure Mopower was being sarcastic.

Or at least I think so.

On another note, benedict just responded to this thread here in the feedback forum just yesterday, and has been active on the forum ever since this thread was started.

Like I said, no matter if the mods or reviewers wish to admit it, they sometimes obviously ignore certain threads and/or emails when people question them.

This is the first time that I've opened the thread and I am providing a partial response straight away. I am afraid that anyone who suggests otherwise is plain wrong. kuroiinu got it right: until the title was changed today by an Admin, it did not register with me. I think I have a history of responding to feedback so I am sorry that so many have taken the view that I was deliberately ignoring criticism. I wasn't.

In order that we might all gain from the situation, I'd like to suggest the following for the future:

1. Anyone wanting to start a serious debate about a particular issue should henceforth ensure that the subject/title gives an indication of what is inside.
2. Respondents take account of the fact that we all have lives and do not always get to view the forum every day. My own posting and reading during March, for example, was sporadic to say the least.

When time allows I will look back through the old threads and endeavour to put together a meaningful response. Until then I can make the following observations:<ul><li>MWB you should not be shy of making informed/constructive criticism here. That is what Feedback is for. I am sorry that I did not receive your email. I just checked the gmail emailbox to which my DVDtalk address forwards and cannot find anything from you - even amidst the 1300 spam messages. Sod's Law, I guess.<li>I tend to close threads when I notice that they are over 5 pages or so. This isn't scientific but the evidence is there if you look for it. Sometimes I suggest someone starts a new one; sometimes I just leave it to the regulars to go ahead and do it.<li>The last thread I closed included a reason but also called for someone to start a poll to see whether my view was supported i.e. if Music Talkers thought that it was mean to stifle discussion they could make their views plain. It seems that my message was less than clear.</li></ul>As I say, when I get the time to look through the old threads I'll post here again. I can't precisely say when that'll be but expect to have something up by Saturday.

As a completely separate thing, can I ask why? I'm really struggling to come up with a good reason to close a discussion that is actually lively (as evidenced by the 5 page thing)? I know it can't be a length/server issue, because threads in many of the other forums go far far longer.

I find it utterly amazing that in the past, a member has kept multiple Madonna threads alive almost single-handedly(!) -- for years(!!) -- and nothing was said or done about it, yet this topic seems to get closed down repeatedly despite active discussion by *gasp* more than one person. It's pretty obvious to me that there is serious bias at work here, and the sooner all parties cop to it, the better off the forum will be.

MWB claims to have emailed you before this thread was ever posted, and I emailed you a link to this thread on two separate occassions. I guess you didn't get either of those, either. Personally, I don't care how long it took you to respond to this thread...but perhaps you should either update your email address in the DVDTalk system, or make an effort to check it more often. Especially if you make it a point to request that certain issues be addressed via email. Just a suggestion..

If you don't have the spare time to spend on the internet, "moderator" of a subforum on a site like DVDTalk sure does seem like an ill-advised position to be holding..

In addition to LurkerDan's legitimate question about this method of yours, I have to add the following: In five pages of threads going back just one month (to 03/12), I count eight separate music threads, five pages or longer, zero of which are locked. Yet the "open letter to Axl Rose" thread was merely two pages in length when you decided that the members' harmless conversation had gone on long enough.

So, lock first, question later?

Honestly, do you really need us to tell you how to do this cyber-job of yours? Do you need us to tell you, in a separate poll no less, that if we're engrossed in conversation about a topic it's probably not a good idea to barge in and lock the thread just because you feel like it?

I have to agree with everything you've said.

I think you need to read his post again. ;)

Thanks, but I'm not much for rocking the boat, and I usually don't have much of a problem with how things are run around here, anyway. But this time, I did. (And truth be known, I had given some thought to starting a similar thread here back in December, with the lockage of the first thread and your comments in the concert thread.)

I don't know what "Sod's Law" means, and don't really care enough to look it up, either. I did update my e-mail address in my profile right after I sent it, so maybe that has something to do with it; I don't know. I can resend, if you like, but most of it has already been covered in this thread, anyway.

Not to get too into this ('cause it's a secondary reason, at best, in my opinion), but could the staff possibly come together and find a common ground on when to close threads due to length? Because there doesn't appear to be any particular agreed-upon standard here. You closed a thread that had 200-something replies, but there's a thread right now in Other that's approaching 800 replies (and is showing no signs of slowing down). I've seen other threads that have gone for over a thousand. Threads in the video game section usually get to around 700 or before they're locked. It's just all over the place. It'd be much better if there was, for example, a 500-reply limit to all threads, across all sections.

But, like I said, I don't think the length is the main reason the threads are getting locked up, anyway. It's pretty obvious that you don't care for Axl Rose or Guns N' Roses. And that's all fine and good--I don't particularly care for him myself, and I think it's disrespectful to the old guys that he's using that name.

But it seems to me that you're taking it a step further, and going out of your way to hinder conversation on the subject--conversation which hasn't broken any of the forum rules, as far as I know. (The only problem I can ever recall with a GN'R thread was when someone posted a link to some leaked demos about a year ago, which was quickly taken care of.)

To me, that's the big issue that really needs to be addressed. I think it sets a dangerous precedent.

Personally, I think every mod should read every thread in the feedback forum. It would take maybe 45 seconds a day to do so, and would help them in their "job".

I can't stand GnR, never liked them when they were all the rage in the 80s, and don't like Axl now. But I agree, a mod should not get to decide what does or doesn't get to be discussed, so long as the discussion stays within forum rules. If people want to discuss how Raffi is the greatest songwriter of the 20th century, they get to. Just because I may be a bitter childless mod with a man crush on Bob Dylan doesn't mean I should close that discussion.

As I've said in my first post to this thread, I'll address the original issues when I get time to re-familiarise myself with all of the threads. This is looking to be a task that I'll get around to this weekend.

Naturally, I will be including information that I hope will demonstrate that, notwithstanding my honest and open admission as to my opinion of a particular vocalist, I have endeavoured to bring a consistent and even-handed approach to moderating. In the meantime, I would ask that those posting here give me a little credit and suspend their judgement if they can find it in themselves to contemplate the possibility that there is more to it than the arguments so far put forward.

Trevor, there was a time when I used to read all the threads in Feedback. Unfortunately, time is at a premium, and something had to give. I noticed that there was a tendency for some people not to help themselves by using the search function regarding FAQs and the like, over time, and I made a (possibly unconscious) decision only to peruse those Feedback threads whose titles piqued my interest e.g anything specifically referencing Music/Book/International or a topic with which I thought I'd be able to assist swiftly.

With all this build up it better be good.

The irony of all this, for me, is that while a mod was spending his time closing a thread that nobody else wanted closed and probably needn't have been, he could have used that time productively to <a href = "http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=488325&page=1&pp=25">merge</a> <a href = "http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showpost.php?p=7724197&postcount=5">two threads</a> and <a href = "http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showpost.php?p=7724258&postcount=6">sticky them</a>, as had been requested by forum members. But I'm not a mod, so therefore I'm not smart and wise. :shrug: