Episode III spoilers forum: Acceptable behavior?

I just tried accessing the thread in question to re-read it, but the message came up "Topic not found - has been removed".

so does that mean we can't even read it now?

g

 

I meant the word 'ire'. I was trying to be funny by making a play on the old saying. I guess it wasn't funny.

 

I just tried accessing the thread in question to re-read it, but the message came up "Topic not found - has been removed".

so does that mean we can't even read it now?

That is rather odd. Usually topics that are locked are not deleted afterward. Also odd is that it wasn't until a few days later they decided to delete it. I'm not sure why, it wasn't hurting anything to have the thread available for viewing, and it will hurt this thread to have it removed. Can anybody who is higher-up explain why this has happened?

 

so does that mean we can't even read it now?

It was pruned like any other locked topic in 3SA...

 

Threads are removed in the 3SA, due to high visibility and traffic, after they've been locked for 24 hours or if they're at the very end and going to be auto-pruned and have been system-locked due to inactivity.

 

Hawk, I'm blushing. Thank you for all your great posts!

I've been a SW fan since June 1977. I recognize that the 1977 SW film is the best movie ever made. I smile at the irony when people say I'm not a fan. I've been a SW fan for 26 years. My own counsel I will keep on who is a fan.

My problem isn't primarily with a thread getting locked.

Nor is it primarily with getting flamed.

My problem is that a critical discussion of the E3 spoilers is essentially impossible. Spoilers can't be posted in the Sanctuary, so that's out. A critical thread won't survive more than a day in the E3 spoilers forum.

That is the problem.

 

If a thread is started that is allowed in the 3SA, it happens to be well thought out and intellectual, and folks aren't posting in it, not much can be done to help it. That's the equilibrium of the forum. The focus is on other things and though your thread was great, the timing was off.

 

There is plenty of critical discussion about particular spoilers ensuing in 3SA. I suggest you go join one of those threads instead of starting one that is critical of Ep3 solely based on Ep1 and Ep2.

 

And I ask, once again, was anything done about the members who were involved with the flaming? This is Elfstar's concern in the opening post.

 

The person who posted the thread deserves the same punishment as those doing the flaming. That's my answer to the question.

 

Now you're saying people should be punished if they dare post a critical opinion?

 

Especially when he makes your "blood boil" foxbatkllr?

 

Let me add to my previous post about why I locked the thread.

These boards are, by definition, a discussion forum. Discussion. Discussion requires that you listen to what the other person has to say, acknowledge it, accept it, and respond to it. The thread in question was filled with people telling, not talking, and failing to listen. There was no discussion. And it was obvious that there was not going to be any discussion. I've seen that thread before. I've seen it thousands of times. I know it has one purpose and was going to one place, and we do not allow threads to go to that place in 3SA.

 

I saw a lot of people telling but I also saw Binary put other's opinions into qutoes and respond to them intelligently. How is this not a discussion? Because he disagrees?

Also, was ANYONE warned or banned for their innapropriate behaviour?

 

I don't discuss actions taken against users with other users. Just because you don't know about it, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

So, in other words, no.

 

I'm going to trust that the mods there did what they saw fit. I think the mods in 3SA are great, and I'm going to just trust their judgment at this point. We don't know what they did or didn't do to the flamers, and they have no obligation to disclose to us what was done. I've said my peace on the matter

 

Now you're saying people should be punished if they dare post a critical opinion?

No, I'm saying when people post flame bait they should be punished.

Especially when he makes your "blood boil" foxbatkllr?

I was expressing my frustration at the ridiculous thread, its obvious intentions, and my inability to do anything about it.

 

Hawk, I'm blushing. Thank you for all your great posts!

You know, there have been other quality posts in this thread. This single statement perfectly illustrates a reason why people from the "basher" ideology aren't given much of a chance in places like 3SA. I've VERY rarely seen a quality post complimented by one of you guys if it didn't come from a fellow basher. It's almost like you purposefully ignore all posts except those you agree with, and it's annoying to a lot of people.


My problem is that a critical discussion of the E3 spoilers is essentially impossible.

Did you really mean "negative" discussion? Because there are plenty of quality discussion topics that weren't started by you or another basher's sanctuary resident worthy of good discussion going back and forth. Take a minute to actually read through some of the topics. If you want to find a place where you can endlessly slam Star Wars without opposition, I suggest AICN's boards.

Spoilers can't be posted in the Sanctuary, so that's out. A critical thread won't survive more than a day in the E3 spoilers forum.

Wrong. Quality discussion can occur where people disagree. It's like when dehrian said. Acknowledging legitimate points other people make, respecting them and responding in kind gets you a long way here. If people see you are at least willing to understand where they are coming from, you win yourself a TON of respect. Rebel Scumb is a sterling example of this.

Just because a thread isn't filled with people agreeing with you doesn't mean it's not a good thread. Not everyone thinks the same way you think. The sooner you afford respect to differing opinions, the sooner you will find yours getting that respect in turn.

 

You know, there have been other quality posts in this thread. This single statement perfectly illustrates a reason why people from the "basher" ideology aren't given much of a chance in places like 3SA. I've VERY rarely seen a quality post complimented by one of you guys if it didn't come from a fellow basher. It's almost like you purposefully ignore all posts except those you agree with, and it's annoying to a lot of people.

As opposed to the praising of our posts from "gushers" which are much more frequent?

 

The person who posted the thread deserves the same punishment as those doing the flaming. That's my answer to the question.

How is posting a thread that questions E3's darkness flame baiting? How is questioning an aspect of a movie that doesn't outright insult someone flame baiting? (E3 not being dark does not make it a bad movie, or make GL a bad peson). Look, if people can't handle a little criticism over something that they don't even have ownership over, then that's really their problem, not the person making the post.

Examples of flame-baiting are unflattering generalization about a group of people or veiled insults. Expressing a concern is not flame baiting, especially if someone backs their concerns with some form of evidence (whether or not you agree with their evidence, in fact, that's what discussion's for).


I know it has one purpose and was going to one place, and we do not allow threads to go to that place in 3SA.

What place is that?


Spoilers can't be posted in the Sanctuary, so that's out. A critical thread won't survive more than a day in the E3 spoilers forum.

Wrong. Quality discussion can occur where people disagree.

Could you post some examples? I'm curious how you define disagreeing in this context. I want to give you a fair shake, but I really want to see what you mean before I agree or disagree with your remark.

 

I suggest every "basher" go through and read both Rebel Scumb's and AL's posts throughout the 3SA forum. You will then learn how it is possible to disagree and engage in "discussion" without flame baiting.

Oh, and yes it is flame baiting. Quit playing dumb. You and all the bashers know what kind of reaction you would get posting a thread like that in 3SA. It is not flame baiting because you wanted to "discuss" and "express a different opinion." If that's what you wanted to do, you'd act like Rebel Scumb or AL. No, it is flame baiting because its purpose was to get people riled up. I could go to theonering.net and say "I don't think Return of the King will be very good because the characters are lame and I don't care about them at all." However, I know exactly how well that would be received. We all know how well that would be received. Before posting a thread, use common sense, unless of course the aim is to draw flaming...

 

Stryphe:

Pretty much any SPY REPORT thread contains disagreement on all sides. The first couple pages or so are mostly people saying "Wow I can't wait to see this." After that, the nitty gritty of the report comes to the forefront, with people offering different theories on what could be based on this report.

Or how about this thread discussing quotes?

Or how about this one which gets into perhaps the one thing fans might look forward to the most.

Or how about this one discussing the pros and cons of running time for this film.

Or how about this one where people evaluate a possible concept drawing of a character.


Most of the people in 3SA are excited about the release of the film. I think they perceive anyone who comes in and says "Oh since the prequels sucked, I'm sure this part of Ep. 3 will too so whatever.." as a party pooper for lack of a better term.

 

Oh, and yes it is flame baiting. Quit playing dumb.

OK, how is posting something along the lines of thinking E3 won't be dark a flame bait, but accusing me of "playing dumb" (either saying I'm ignorant, or am a sneaky bastard with a hidden agenda, I'm not sure which you meant, but I'm assuming the later) isn't flame baiting? Perhaps you have all this proof that I enjoy flame baiting and engage in it? Perhaps you have evidence I insight others to flamebait and am a firm supporter of flame baiting? Could you post examples of me baiting flames? Really, please do. I then invite all the moderators to review any evidence he posts, no - I encourage them to review it.

However, I then want you to post all the evidence you have that giving a discerning opinion back with evidence for the said opinion (accurate or inaccurate, regardless) over something that the group reading the opinion has no ownership over, and is not directed against them - is flame baiting.

The ball is in your court and the gauntlet at your feet. I await the moderators decision of my alledged flame baiting agenda.