EVE Search - Policy on threadlocking

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Policy on threadlocking

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)

CCP RyanD Caldari C C P	Posted - 2008.10.26 01:32:00 - [1] I have noticed a number of people commenting on the threadlocking activities that happened during the Ghost Training notification. I wanted to just let everyone know what the policy is, so we're clear. If we decide to issue a Devblog on a topic that has spawned a lengthy thread, we will lock that thread, and the last message in the thread will contain a link to the comments thread associated with the Devblog. This is not a sinister attempt to silence people, but is rather an attempt to concentrate all the feedback into one place so that there's an easier 2-way channel of communication. This is the same reason that we don't like it when posters open similar threads to ongoing discussions - we want to keep all the discussion of an active topic in one place. When we do threadlock a discussion, that thread should always remain visible. During the Ghost Training discussions, a thread was made invisible on accident, not on purpose, and as soon as we figured out how to fix that problem, visibility was restored. It is not our policy to hide threads that have been threadlocked & forwarded to a comment thread, that particular incident was unintentional. We'd ask everyone to help us with this policy by just going to the comment threads when we take these actions, and not re-opening new threads in the discussion forums. If you want your opinions to be heard, keep them in the thread that is going to be read by Devs following the Devblog. Thanks! RyanD

CEO Character Morphed Dynamics	Posted - 2008.10.26 01:33:00 - [2] What about CCP Fallout's rage against bumping in Want Ads? More explanation is needed about that then "I'll unlock the threads". - - -
Viper ShizzIe The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.10.26 01:35:00 - [3] Since when did marketing take over community management?
CEO Character Morphed Dynamics	Posted - 2008.10.26 01:42:00 - [4] Lack of sticky. - - -
Frug Repo Industries	Posted - 2008.10.26 02:08:00 - [5] Edited by: Frug on 26/10/2008 02:07:46 Oh please... Their explanation and handling of the ghost training issue has been pathetic and miserable, but whining about the forum policies, which need to be the way they are to keep rabble and spam down, is not winning anyone over. - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles
Dragon Rawr	Posted - 2008.10.26 04:36:00 - [6] Originally by: CEO Character What about CCP Fallout's rage against bumping in Want Ads? More explanation is needed about that then "I'll unlock the threads". Agreed, Locking ads that are bumped once every two days or bumped once a day over the span of a month etc? No one is breaking any rules. And THEN there is the whole: "Discussing what mods do is against the rules" when someone simply said "Why is he locking threads when no one is breaking rules" See Here The rules say nothing about what is in this post, the rules mention PRIVATE discussions, not what was covered here.
Necrosmith Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2008.10.26 04:37:00 - [7] I prefer semaphores myself. ------------- "Isk is cheap. Life is cheaper. This week, they're having a sale on both." Laugh until you cry: Battle Asses "Meow" is "woof" in cat.
Lord Windu Imperiosus Tutela	Posted - 2008.10.26 05:06:00 - [8] IBTL... oh wait. My bad
Chaos Incarnate Faceless Logistics	Posted - 2008.10.26 05:12:00 - [9] Originally by: Lord Windu IBTL... oh wait. My bad Shoulda gone with IACCP
Aloriana Jacques Amarr Royal Amarr Institute	Posted - 2008.10.26 05:16:00 - [10] What I'd like to see when mods lock threads for reasons other then redirection, they would state why(which they usually do) and what section of the rules the lock falls under, some things are up to broad interpretation. Example: In this thread, CCP Fallout states that we cannot discuss moderator actions, but the closest I've found in the rules is section 9 which states that we cannot speak of PRIVATE communications. This is sort of thing we need cleared up as well. It would be very helpful. - - - Aloriana Jacques - Skill Sheet
CEO Character Morphed Dynamics	Posted - 2008.10.26 05:22:00 - [11] Edited by: CEO Character on 26/10/2008 05:22:28 Originally by: Aloriana Jacques What I'd like to see when mods lock threads for reasons other then redirection, they would state why(which they usually do) and what section of the rules the lock falls under, some things are up to broad interpretation. Example: In this thread, CCP Fallout states that we cannot discuss moderator actions, but the closest I've found in the rules is section 9 which states that we cannot speak of PRIVATE communications. This is sort of thing we need cleared up as well. It would be very helpful. Sorry you're wrong. Originally by: Forum Rules Likewise, discussions regarding moderator actions are not permitted on the forum. Linkage (under #10) However, Fallout's actions were rogue. She shouldn't of locked all those threads for bumping. - - -
Aloriana Jacques Amarr Royal Amarr Institute	Posted - 2008.10.26 05:35:00 - [12] Originally by: CEO Character Sorry you're wrong. Originally by: Forum Rules Likewise, discussions regarding moderator actions are not permitted on the forum. Linkage (under #10) I stand corrected and withdraw my previous statement. However, my previous request still stands. (Thanks CEO) - - - Aloriana Jacques - Skill Sheet
Komatose Caldari Libertas Contraho	Posted - 2008.10.26 06:39:00 - [13] Originally by: Aloriana Jacques What I'd like to see when mods lock threads for reasons other then redirection, they would state why(which they usually do) and what section of the rules the lock falls under, some things are up to broad interpretation. Example: In this thread, CCP Fallout states that we cannot discuss moderator actions, but the closest I've found in the rules is section 9 which states that we cannot speak of PRIVATE communications. This is sort of thing we need cleared up as well. It would be very helpful. Thusly Restating what dragonrawr said :P
Winterblink Body Count Inc.	Posted - 2008.10.26 06:45:00 - [14] Originally by: CEO Character Lack of sticky. Hah, if they stickied every thread that like this that actually explains a misunderstood issue to the community, there'd be nothing else on the first page.
Del Narveux Dukes of Hazard	Posted - 2008.10.26 08:21:00 - [15] Originally by: CCP RyanD During the Ghost Training discussions, a thread was made invisible on accident, not on purpose, and as soon as we figured out how to fix that problem, visibility was restored. It was a ghost thread amirite Anyway thanks for the clarification, CCP is usually pretty good about communicating with the community but, combined with the nano nerf, a lot of people were on edge that there might be something beneath the surface.
Estel Arador Minmatar	Posted - 2008.10.26 08:24:00 - [16] OMG CCP RyanD is discussing moderation!!!!
Wadaya Caldari Trailerpark Industries	Posted - 2008.10.26 09:14:00 - [17] But he's not talking about the clueless moderation. Wad
defiler Mad Hermit Wayward Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.26 09:14:00 - [18] Originally by: Necrosmith I prefer semaphores myself. snerk I'd write something witty here, but unfortunately I'm busy waiting for a release (Fallout 3).
LaVista Vista Conservative Shenanigans Party	Posted - 2008.10.26 09:31:00 - [19] Ryan, I understand that you don't want your forum spammed with threads on the issue. But that does not justify locking CSM threads about it. 2 threads were locked in the CSM forum with the reason that we can't discuss ghost training in other threads than the dev-blog. However, they weren't discussion threads. They were threads for people to support an escalation on the issue of ghost training to CCP. While the threads in question were unlocked, I'm sorry to say that you can't just blame the community for not "following the rules".
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.10.26 09:47:00 - [20] Letting people reply to this thread was a mistake, now you have every idiot posting whine comments about moderation (although the CCP Fallout stuff in want ads was hilarious, that guy is nuts) Lock this thread, sticky it for a week or two and be done with it.
Volarius D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.10.26 09:47:00 - [21] Thanks for explaining the nature of threatlocking. But I wonder. What is the policy on making threads invisible? I know from personal experience that all it takes is a single mail to the mods and your thread will be removed with all its replies as if it never existed. Doesn't that seem a bit unfair?
NereSky Gallente Trinity Nova Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2008.10.26 09:50:00 - [22] Originally by: LaVista Vista Ryan, I understand that you don't want your forum spammed with threads on the issue. But that does not justify locking CSM threads about it. 2 threads were locked in the CSM forum with the reason that we can't discuss ghost training in other threads than the dev-blog. However, they weren't discussion threads. They were threads for people to support an escalation on the issue of ghost training to CCP. While the threads in question were unlocked, I'm sorry to say that you can't just blame the community for not "following the rules". Apologies to the Gms for discussing petitions - however, i did petition this and a reply was a apology from the relevant gm and subsequent unlocking of the thread in question, personnally as it was soon rectified and no harm done to the voting process i submit to move on anf forgive - i think GM's are human most times and can make mistakes whch this was one.
Gloria Stitz	Posted - 2008.10.26 09:56:00 - [23] The thread I posted at the time, which broke no rules, is still deleted. So are you lying, or have you been lied to?
LaVista Vista Conservative Shenanigans Party	Posted - 2008.10.26 10:00:00 - [24] Originally by: NereSky Apologies to the Gms for discussing petitions - however, i did petition this and a reply was a apology from the relevant gm and subsequent unlocking of the thread in question, personnally as it was soon rectified and no harm done to the voting process i submit to move on anf forgive - i think GM's are human most times and can make mistakes whch this was one. Well, no doubt it's forgiven. I did mail the csm admin and let him know that he should tell the moderator to unluck it. However, the point still stands: Just because CCP locks threads it doesn't make them right. If we can't even discuss hot topics in a CSM context without getting them locked, we are pretty damn bad off.
NereSky Gallente Trinity Nova Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2008.10.26 10:02:00 - [25] Originally by: Gloria Stitz The thread I posted at the time, which broke no rules, is still deleted. So are you lying, or have you been lied to? Neither this is the thread i mentioned http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=896079
NereSky Gallente Trinity Nova Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2008.10.26 10:04:00 - [26] And as i said Gm's are human some of the time and make errors - locking a voting thread was one of em - they have apologised, unlocked the thread - so what more can be done?
Gloria Stitz	Posted - 2008.10.26 10:09:00 - [27] Originally by: NereSky Originally by: Gloria Stitz The thread I posted at the time, which broke no rules, is still deleted. So are you lying, or have you been lied to? Neither this is the thread i mentioned http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=896079 I was talking to the OP ------------- 'Don't try to learn Eve all at once, otherwise your brain will explode' - Albert Einstein ------------
RedSplat Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.10.26 10:36:00 - [28] Originally by: CCP RyanD During the Ghost Training discussions, a thread was made invisible on accident, not on purpose, and as soon as we figured out how to fix that problem, visibility was restored. Took you a while. I think i shall fearfully clutch my tinfoil hat a bit longer, billing knows where i live afterall. <.< >.>
Waxau Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2008.10.26 11:26:00 - [29] Meh. Its a game. CCP have done well so far, so no flamage from me.
Benedic The Aftermath	Posted - 2008.10.26 13:16:00 - [30] Edited by: Benedic on 26/10/2008 13:15:49 If only there was a sticky linking to the near record length ghost training discussion thread from the general forum. Well, you can't waste that valuable forum real estate right? Much better spent on 2 stickies on zulupark's questions/answers that avoid any real issues.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.