[Suggestion]TID: Resolution

[quote=Adonikam][quote]calculate the -'s by the total posts in the topic[/quote][/quote]

[quote=Searz]Oh, you must've posted that while I was writing. Good idea nonetheless.[/quote]

[quote=Alahric]I came up with a new idea instead: Move the thread instead of locking it, I'm thinking more of a junk folder. Or [color=red]hell[/color] if you prefer Matt ;)[/quote]

[quote=DEWO][quote=Alahric] 1. Should we lock threads if people are derailing topics, cursing, etc? 2. Should we report the people who were derailing topics, cursing, etc? 3. Should we ignore the people and thread altogether? 1. Add a searchtool and warning to all the threads to avoid thread duplication. 2. Only use lock thread as last resort, just report it or let the thread die out. 3. Allow the author of the thread to be able to lock the thread. [EDIT]: Move the thread instead of locking it, I'm thinking more of a junk folder or hell if you prefer. Go! [/quote] 1. If the question got its anwer, there is 2 pages of total offtopic... i dont feel that locking it is a bad idea. 2. Derailing topics - no, obsesisve cursing - yes. 3. Well as a mod... i cant... 1. As Matt said. It is high prio on his list probably so... lets just wait a bitsy... 2. I am treating Archive (so for you it is like a delete) thread as last resort. locking is more friendly since ppl that face the same issue can still browse the thread. But also if we let users trollololol the whole thread it will change into a 2 page of something constructive and 10 pages of total offtop... ppl might again post a new thread on the same issue just coz the last one was TL:DR and filled with spam. 3. Author of the thread is not allowed to do it coz he doesnt OWN the thread. he just owns 1st post and all other that he made. It wouldnt be fair that ppl that participated in conversation (many times more than the author did) have their topic locked. so a big NO NO from me. We just have to find balance on the moderating thing. It is a new feature so lets not overdo on it. I try not to lock anything. But sometimes it is just asking for it. And again we have a report function. It is the fastest way to get our attension that we did something wrong. USE IT.[/quote]

[quote=Alahric][quote=DEWO]1. If the question got its anwer, there is 2 pages of total offtopic... i dont feel that locking it is a bad idea. 2. Derailing topics - no, obsesisve cursing - yes. 3. Well as a mod... i cant...[/quote]Well, I do see the problem with ignoring them but "locking" doesn't seem like the right course of action. If we render everything m00t, why don't you make the topics, decide what you want us to post about. I want to know where the threshold is. [quote=DEWO]1. As Matt said. It is high prio on his list probably so... lets just wait a bitsy... 2. I am treating Archive (so for you it is like a delete) thread as last resort. locking is more friendly since ppl that face the same issue can still browse the thread. But also if we let users trollololol the whole thread it will change into a 2 page of something constructive and 10 pages of total offtop... ppl might again post a new thread on the same issue just coz the last one was TL:DR and filled with spam. 3. Author of the thread is not allowed to do it coz he doesnt OWN the thread. he just owns 1st post and all other that he made. It wouldnt be fair that ppl that participated in conversation (many times more than the author did) have their topic locked. so a big NO NO from me.[/quote]1. Didn't know that you knew, I thought it would be out already. 2. I can see that now, which is primarily why I urged the edit. 3. Double standard? But yes, I agree. However, that means you should lock the thread despite the OP's needs being met. He doesn't own the thread, meaning you can't lock the thread because he is satisfied or you believe that he is. Overall I'd be wanting you to address the "move thread instead of locking it", a junk folder would solve the first issue and with people posting they could care enough to see the action unjust (although I don't think that will happen, the case being unjust that is). Besides, it'll be the best allusion ever. [quote=DEWO]We just have to find balance on the moderating thing. It is a new feature so lets not overdo on it. I try not to lock anything. But sometimes it is just asking for it. And again we have a report function. It is the fastest way to get our attension that we did something wrong. USE IT.[/quote]mhm.[/quote]

[quote=DEWO]THe problem with junk thread is that we are afraid of doing so. Why? Becouse for you guys it will vanish and som1 might get a bit paranoid about this and create another topic. Maybe when we will get the search option...[/quote]

[quote=JunSupport][quote=Alahric] Everyone wants this to be a democracy, but in reality it is just a really kickass dictatorship. [/quote] [color=yellow]I don't want this to be a democracy. o_o[/color] Democracies are stupid, they're run by "people." And as "K" once said: "[i]A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. [/i]" A dictatorship with a good and strong person as the leader is ideal. If the dictatorship is a problem, people revolt, or leave. In this case, leave, since it's online.[/quote]

[quote=Alahric][/u]Well, this reminds me of what a guy in the previous thread said; [i]"they don't let 5 year olds vote in democracies".[/i] If that's the case then they also tax their citizens. Case closed. Oh, Jun love what you're implying but I was actually talking about opinions. e.i you, me, we all have something we want to say. Unfortunatly, people always form opinions on stuff they don't really know much about. The more opinions they have, the more ignorant they are. Yes, that was self depricating.. Anyway, I really got to stop looking for problems. Still, it's getting fixed.[/quote]

[quote=JunSupport]@Alahric: Citizens should be taxed. There are many services we are provided everyday that need to be taxed. The problem with a democracy is people will not vote again for a president who institutes new tax. So they can't put taxes on what's needed. Democracies are broken because political parties are forced to focus on "how to get re-elected" instead of "how to make the country a better place to live." There is a good economic government system that works, but it depends on taxing citizens to repay the loans used to fund government projects like building roads/buildings and fixing public services. Lots of modern countries use it. But, guess what step they skip? Taxing to repay. That's why countries like US are deep in debt. e.e[/quote]

[quote=Alahric]Who knew thinking could get me into science and politics, sadly I'm lacking insight because I'm too lazy to do some research. I could say it's about how the world ought to be, not how it is. But that's where it all turns evil from the best of intentions. All this search for the garden of eden and eternity just seems to be another aspect of our greed. Truth is; I would bite the fruit anyday.[/quote]