hello
i wanted to respond to some of the comments left in this thread (which was moved to WoB but the moderators felt would benefit from a home here. we've discussed this as a team but these comments are my own:
Originally posted by psychoblast
The issue is whether, if you want to discuss a film on here, you are REQUIRED by the moderators to search back OVER TWO MONTHS to bump a prior discussion thread on the movie. In MY very open-minded opinion, that just demands too much of posters.
i don't believe it demands too much of posters at all. the search function defaults to 'any date' for the search period so you can search the entire history of the forum using the search feature's default setting.
if you are talking to the effort required to scan pages of thread subjects manually the i agree there's an increased burden the further back you go. the solution is easy. there's a search feature. use it.
to put this in perspective, i've moderated F&T for the bulk of my time as a bluelighter and this is the first and only time this has been raised as an issue.
Originally posted by psychoblast
So, basically, it is like the mods on here are implicitly declaring their policy by this action that you can NEVER have multiple threads on the same film. Is that it?
no. that's not it. while the most convenient unit of discussion for a movie in this forum is a thread, there have been cases in the past and there will be in the future where the discussion is from such a different perspective or at such a tangent that two threads make more sense.
Originally posted by psychoblast
Anyway, you mods should get together and consider how old a thread on a film must be to allow a new thread on the film.
the answer is that's there's no specific limit. we ask all bluelighters to remember to do a search before posting.
Originally posted by psychoblast
It is kind of ironic to get such nazi-moderating...
i fail to see how one action = nazi-moderating. we've all spent a lot of time introducing new features here and moderating reasonably subtly to create a forum in which the signal to noise ratio speaks for itself. we're not perfect but i think we all do a pretty good job and that accusation is just plain silly.
Originally posted by psychoblast
I've posted on (and moderated) forums like that, so I should know.
indeed. you shoudl also know that starting a complaint thread in the forum is not the correct way to address a complaint...
Originally posted by psychoblast
As you can see, without my thread title, no passionate discussion on here has started.
it's just as likely that the thread title had nothing to do with it and your post simply failed to spark the debate you expected. that happens too.
Originally posted by L O V E L I F E
Moderation for the sake of moderation is a moderately negative thing.
i agree. if you or anybody would like to show a pattern of moderation for the sake of it, i'm all ears. i just don't think one incident means all of a sudden we don't know what we're doing.
thanks, indeed, for the comments. they are always very welcome.
alasdair