Why are all these threads being locked down?

[SteelyDan]

Okay, I've got all of 6 posts to my credit, so I don't expect to carry much weight around here. But I still feel like I've got to speak out on this.

I was reading a thread about the media's reaction to the movie "Black Hawk Down." The author's point, right or wrong, was that our devotion to political correctness was leading toward a re-write of history. Three or four posts into the thread, it got locked down as being "inappropriate." In a word, why?

I went back and read the board's policies. It says we can post about firearms, accessories, and "civil liberties issues." To my way of thinking, political correctness is at the heart of the threats to our civil liberties. Plus, the thread was started in the "General Discussions" forum, where there's usually a little slack cut anyway. So why was it locked up?

Then I went back and saw there was a review of the movie, that wasn't locked up, even though it obviously had nothing to do with firearms or our civil liberties.

So I went back and re-read the original post twice, to see if it was trool-bait or racially offensive, or anything else. It wasn't. In fairness, it used the word "savages," to describe the kind of people who would drag a dead person through the streets. In a PC domain, that's a term that gets a lot of scrutiny, and I'm just guessing that's why the thread got yanked. I just didn't realize we were so PC. I couldn't care less if someone is black, white, or purple, but when someone exhibits that kind of behavior it merits the label "savage." And that is all the author was saying.

Then I noticed that two or three or four other threads had also been locked up. Admittedly, at least one of them wasn't started by a Rhodes scholar, but so what? They weren't offensive, and they were drawing some interest from board members before being closed down. Again, this is the "General Discussion" forum.

I give credit to the fact that you left the posts in place, rather than just making them disappear. That way we have an opportunity to react, which is what I'm trying to do. I'm sorry, but this seemingly PC censorship was the last thing I expected to see here, and it bothers me.

 

[Cosmoline]

Yes, frankly, it does seem like there have been a lot of lock-downs on this board recently. I fully understand the need to keep things firearms related on the General board. However, that policy can be taken too far. It can have a serious chilling effect. I've seen many lists and boards where anyone who strays an inch from the approved topic is smacked down. Those are not fun places to be. TFL has always seemed a little more tolerant. A little loose in the action like a good AK ;-)

On the other hand, I don't have the big picture in front of me. Perhaps the site has been swamped with too many posts lately and the decision was made to clamp down.

 

[EricM]

this seemingly PC censorship was the last thing I expected to see here, and it bothers me

This BBS is a private enterprise. As such it doesn't matter what bothers whom.

 

[PaladinVC]

Easy there, EricM

It's a private enterprise, no doubt there, but it depends on the readers and posters to remain viable. I don't see any advertising, and I'm not paying a fee to use it, so I assume that it won't have a negative impact, economically, if we lose interest or get fed up and stop coming here. However, I'd like to imagine that the administrators are concerned about our opinions, and want our input and discussion, and read and consider threads like this one. For what little it's worth, I'm with SteelyDan on this one. At the very least, I'd like to see moderators post a more thorough explanation of why a thread is closed, rather than just dropping the hammer. I think a good explanation makes the difference between correcting you friends and chastising your dog. If we screw something up, we should know why and how, so that we can conform to the rule, or act to change it. Isn't that what we're all about?

 

[Bud Helms]

Here's one explanation: http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=97922

Wonder why this one got closed?

How about this one?

Here's another. As a matter of fact another "gaming" thread has been going on for a while, here. This one started in April 2000 and gained new life recently. That makes two threads ongoing about a TFL gaming server. Here is the other.

What you need to remember is that these things seem to come in cycles. 'Don't know why, but you log in one afternoon and here's all these "interesting" threads about some online article that caught the member's attention and he posts it here and guess what? It gets evaluated for duplication, topicality, interest, policy compliance, participation, civility and a whole lot of other considerations. Then we make a decision to 1) leave it alone, 1) leave it alone for a while to let someone get an answer to a problem (like with his computer), 3) leave it alone to see if it comes around to something about guns, 4) leave it alone to see if it will stay civil (or turn civil from a bad start) or 5) just close it. We don't ever close a thread just because we don't like it, or don't like the thread starter. As a matter of fact, just riding through the forums and whacking threads after a hard day at the office is frowned on.

'Can't make everybody happy, but we try.

- sensop

 

[SteelyDan]

sensop:

I'm really not trying to pick a fight here, but your explanation didn't even begin to explain the reason for locking the post.

Oh well, it's late, I've had a bad day, and maybe I'm just being cranky. But I still don't get it.

 

[Quartus]

Sensop, I like the way you closed Mike Irwin's thread on Rogue Spear! Smack! One shot kill! Subtle and yet direct.


Steely, the explanations on links sensop provided to closed threads that sensop gave made perfect sense to me. They just weren't gun related. THat's what this board is about.


Sometimes the moderators may make a bad call on a civil liberties issue, but in general I think they do an outstanding job. (Of course, if they ever closed a thread that I started, that would obviously be a bad call, but they haven't made that mistake yet. )

If you have a question on a particular thread, PM them and ask. And don't expect to always agree.

Remember, this board is private property. Our 1st amendment rights don't apply here, any more than they do in someone else's living room.

 

[yankytrash]

Steely -

I believe the point, in your example, sensop was trying to give you was when he said, "4) leave it alone to see if it will stay civil (or turn civil from a bad start) or 5) just close it."

Assumedly, #5 came about in this case because it was starting off on the wrong foot.

After the few months I've been here, I've found that posts that are started in out-right POed rant mode (sometimes indicated by a couple of these: ) are usually closed early. Those discussions normally turn nasty quick, whereas a typical discussion takes a few pages to get there.

Yes, sensop has a tendency to 'clean house' on his shift, but there is, indeed, a method to the madness.

 

[reprobate]

I agree that the moderators do an excellent job here. If you want an example of what this board would be like without them, log on to usenet and check out talk.politics.guns . One visit will be all that it takes for you to be grateful for the "adult supervision" that the moderators provide.

 

[lonegunman]

So sensop, why did you close down the thread about the MLK assassination?

Was it because it was not firearms related? There are several threads going now that are not firearms related.

No offense, and i am not trying to start a fight, just trying to understand.

 

[yankytrash]

My assumption of that particular closing was to avoid this: JFK & second shooter theories.

Whole lotsa "maybe's" and "I think" going on, but no hard evidence of anything. Probably the only reason it kept running was for the references to old Italian rifles and sharp shooting ability.

Where can a thread about conspiracy theories on Martin King, Jr go?

There was a Nike commercial a few years back with Bruce Smith, his humungous shoe, and famous actor (I can't think of his name) that's got an appropriate quote:

"Bad things, man, bad things....."

There's my conspiracy theory.

 

[bullet44]

"political correctness"

It's everywhere, even here.!

Now in defense of this board, like life in general
the bigger the population the more "problems" (I am being PC here) and if you dont control it what
happens.?

I have noticed of late some views by moderators
I dont agree with also however nice thing about
computers they have an off button..

I am very sorry if I have offended anyone, anywhere with this post.:barf:

 

[deanf]

I wish a lot more threads were locked. I don't come here to hash out if the Rev. Dr. King's murder was a conspiracy, or to discuss religion, or any of the other subjects that have come up of late that the thread starter attempts to relate to firearms on the very slipperiest of pretexts.

 

[Bud Helms]

SteelyDan,

I know you're not trying to pick a fight.

Lonegunman,

Not only was it not gun related, but ... it was not even faintly gun-related. A thread doesn't have to be about guns to be gun-related.

"I know what james earl ray said about raoul. there may be someone out there knows more, but i dont think we will ever know for sure.he was spending money from someone."

Is there a question in there? Some clearly stated assertion related to our civil liberties? Second Amendment? First? "... don't think we'll ever know for sure. ..." I agree.

Here's an idea. Tomorrow, 21 Jan 02, is Martin Luther King Day in the US. Go read the Fourteenth Amendment. Get a copy of The Second Amendment Primer by Les Adams and a copy of That Every Man Be Armed by Stephen P. Halbrook. Understand some of the political and social circumstances during the post-Civil War period and the arguments made in the debate over the Fourteenth Amendment. Dr. King's contributions to the condition of black Americans is undeniable and the position of the NAACP on the Second is plain un-American. Did Dr. King support the Second Amendment for all Americans? Did Dr. King support gun control? Is the NAACP (and the ACLU for that matter) honoring his name by using the organization he started to ensure blacks in America have the same opportunities as the rest of us, to support a political agenda that re-enslaves that same group, along with the rest of us? There's a topic for TFL. As long as it stayed on topic and didn't turn into a name-calling flame-fest, that wouldn't get closed, just as an example.

None of us try to be the TFL nanny. But when you expect more, you usually get it. Stay on topic, make a contribution, have a good time, don't take topic closings personal everytime it happens, try to see the moderator's view, have a good time, lighten up, move on ... yada, yada.

 

[bullet44]

"BOYCOTT ALLSTATE!<--Find out why."

I don't come here to read about insurance.

 

[Ed Brunner]

I too have wondered why particular threads have been locked, and the obvious answer is because a moderator decided to do it. As has been mentioned they have this absolute right and there is no appeal.

I have no problem with that principle. It is a small price to pay for free access to the worlds's finest firearms-related forum. There are members who regularly post here who are world-class experts on a variety of firearms-related subjects. There is no other place like this.

The only issue I have had on the subject of locking threads is when it had appeared to be a completely arbitrary decision.

I would suggest that the authority who locks a thread provide an explanation that defines the actual problem rather than experssing general displeasure or disagreement. Perhaps such a change would prevent these endless inquiries.

 

[Bud Helms]

Suggestion noted, Ed.

 

[hammer4nc]

Ed makes a good point. While locking a thread is not earth shattering, it is kind of an emotional slap in the face for the person who has invested the time to post an opinion. Natural for the recipient to feel, well, slapped. If locking is deemed necessary, it would be respectful to clearly state why. The high road is a two-way street.

On another gun forum, admin (in this case anonymous staff) not only locks threads, but outright deletes whole threads if one post is deemed out of bounds...and the boundaries are quite arbitrary/capricious. And when innocent questions are raised..."what happened to this thread?...they too get deleted, frequently with email notification that posting priveleges have been terminated. These well known adminazi tactics have caused good folks to walk away, a loss for the board, in my opinion.

Anyway, thanks to all the moderators here, for taking the time, on what I understand to be a volunteer gig.

 

[El Rojo]

DeanF says,

I wish a lot more threads were locked. I don't come here to hash out if the Rev. Dr. King's murder was a conspiracy, or to discuss religion, or any of the other subjects that have come up of late that the thread starter attempts to relate to firearms on the very slipperiest of pretexts.

I heard this argument a lot over at the Ms. Boards (by the way, I found out about TFL from the Ms. Boards!). If you don't want to read about Dr. King, don't click that thread. I know it is hard to fathom. That is why we have subject headings. I typically don't check out the threads I am not interested in. Most of these threads, if not all, that are under question I have chose to not look at. Usually the only reason I check out a thread that I normally wouldn't is because they are suddenly locked. And when I see them get locked, I think, "Oh! Tabboo! Something naughty must be going on." And then I run into there to see what the deal is.

I agree with most of the moderators choices to lock. If I don't, I get over it. I am not paying anything to be here and this is my favorite BB on the net. TFL is seriously a part of my life (no wise cracks). If the moderators want to shut something down, let them. You can e-mail them and ask them to open it back up. What? You say they are intolerate PC Nazi's and they won't change their mind? I distinctly remember that the "Got Screwed by McMillan" thread in the Art of the Rifle was locked the other day, and yet it is still open now. A mind was changed. Overall the moderators are doing a great job. If you don't like some of these topics don't read them. I think the most important thing is that immature behavior is not tolerated by anyone on these boards. If a member doesn't get onto you for your behavior, the moderators most certainly will. And when I have kids, this would be a good place for them to hang out. Learn how to articulate, learn how to be persuasive, gain typing skills, and do it all in a healthy and moral environment. That is a great idea. My kids are getting a computer with a blocking service that only allows http://thefiringline.com to be on the computer.

 

[Prodigalshooter]

I think the examples given are good reasons for locking threads. I log on to 5 or 6 boards regularly, but on one in particular (no names), there has been a real degadation of the original intent, as a bunch of obvious teens or pre-teens with no spelling or syntax skills and even less common sense, seem to dominate. They "threaten" other posters if they dare to disagree etc.
It would only take a second for a moderator to stop it cold, but it doesn't happen.
Here there seems to be quite a bit of freedom of expression within the guidelines.