›

I wonder

Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
in The Styx
Since my thread in All Sainti on Yeheil Curry was closed after 24 hours of no activity, should that be the same rule for all threads. I mean. I have seen threads pop back up after months of no activity. Shouldn't be there some consistency with all the threads. Even if the thread did not have any more activity, it would slowly sink to the bottom of the message board. I feel slighted with this decision.

Comments

  • ArethosemyfeetArethosemyfeet Shipmate, Heaven Host
    I think you need to read the second clause in the sentence, rather than just the first:
    ...doesn't seem any more to be said
  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    I did read the second clause. How does the moderator know there is nothing more to be said? If there is nothing more to be said, the thread would sink to the bottom of the board like other threads. No, it was closed abruptly and, to me, arbitrarily. There should be consistency in allowing threads to stay active. Either that, or there needs to be a rule about how long all threads should stay open before they close. Yes, I am a little put out about this.
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    The Bishop Curry thread seemed to be turning into a spat between @Gramps49 and another poster, so closure was maybe the best thing at that stage.

    Presiding Bishop Curry, and the ELCA in general, may well be of interest, but Lutherans are very thin on the ground in the UK, so rather beneath our radar on this side of the Pond.

    The subject might make an interesting thread in Ecclesiantics, though.
  • NenyaNenya All Saints Host, Ecclesiantics & MW Host
    The decision to close the thread was the result of some discussion backstage. As the OP observed, the thread was an announcement so arguably there was nothing to discuss at all. Moreover, some of the posts were fractious and not in keeping with the spirit of All Saints. The closure of the thread was not intended as a slight to anyone.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    edited 1:51PM
    Arethosemyfeet wrote: »
    I think you need to read the second clause in the sentence, rather than just the first:
    ...doesn't seem any more to be said
    I agree that the thread seemed to be closed unusually quickly. My experience of the Ship doesn’t bear out the idea that we can tell there’s nothing more to be said by just 24 hours with no posts.

    There are a lot of threads in All Saints that are still open even though no one has posted in them for over a year. One thread in All Saints hasn’t been posted in since December 2023, but it’s still open. I recently posted in a Heaven thread that hadn’t had a post since November, and posting has now continued in that thread by a number of people.

    So I don’t think it is at all unreasonable to ask how a determination could be made in this particular thread that no comments in 24 hours meant there was nothing more to be said and the thread should be closed.


    Bishops Finger wrote: »
    The Bishop Curry thread seemed to be turning into a spat between @Gramps49 and another poster, so closure was maybe the best thing at that stage.
    Why closure rather than moderation and redirection?

    Presiding Bishop Curry, and the ELCA in general, may well be of interest, but Lutherans are very thin on the ground in the UK, so rather beneath our radar on this side of the Pond.
    The frequently UK-centric assumptions of the Ship not withstanding, there are lot of Shipmates who are not from the UK, including a number of Lutheran shipmates. Maybe those for whom this is beneath their radar could read and learn, or just ignore.

    The subject might make an interesting thread in Ecclesiantics, though.
    @Gramps49 first posted it in Ecclesiantics, but that thread was quickly closed as not having anything to do with worship and liturgy, which is what Ecclesiantics is for.


    ETA: Cross-posted with @Nenya.

    I appreciate the explanation, but I must say that I still think the decision wasn’t a good one. I assumed no slight was intended, but thought should also be given to perception, and in light of two other recent threads by Gramps being closed very quickly, the perception was inevitable.

    As for it being an announcement, why not a quick question from a host at least asking whether there is something to be discussed before closing?


  • RuthRuth Shipmate
    Nenya wrote: »
    The decision to close the thread was the result of some discussion backstage. As the OP observed, the thread was an announcement so arguably there was nothing to discuss at all.
    "Arguably" means you could make the argument, implying someone else could argue the opposite. Lots of announcements are discussed. And when there is nothing to discuss, threads just sink.
    Moreover, some of the posts were fractious and not in keeping with the spirit of All Saints.
    So just say that on the thread.
    The closure of the thread was not intended as a slight to anyone.

    IMO intent doesn't matter as much as effect. This was heavy-handed.
  • HeavenlyannieHeavenlyannie Shipmate
    edited 3:27PM
    I also was surprised that the thread was closed, and would have expected just a reminder that the thread was in All Saints so participants should voice their contributions and tone appropriately.
    Closing it didn’t seem in the spirit of All Saints as a community focused board.
Sign In or Register to comment.