Should Members be able to lock threads?

[(poco) Sforzando]

Rabbits, rabbits, rabbits. Lock away!

[Brian]

I don't like rabbits, and if they are mentioned again I will be forced to lock this thread...

So sensitive. Hare-trigger, in fact.

[Karl Henning]

I'm sure rabbit stew is popular in rural New England, although I think a rifle is required.

I don't like rabbits, and if they are mentioned again I will be forced to lock this thread...

Post of the Day!

[Gurn Blanston]

I don't like rabbits, and if they are mentioned again I will be forced to lock this thread...

Nyaaahhh, what's up, Doc? 🥕🤠

[Gurn Blanston]

Maybe they can throw in some crawfish as well, another item I can't find locally. Though chances are I can find both critters in Manhattan, NYC too.

Probably a better chance of it. They ship crawdads alive in wet burlap bags, not sure how well FedEx would do with that. 

[André]

"Self-defense" is subjective and this tactic is open to abuse. What's to prevent me from opening a thread, insulting you, then locking the thread in "self-defense" when you respond to my insults and continuing to insult you while you stand by helplessly?

The moderators will see to it. They're paid a hefty salary for that.

[Brian]

The moderators will see to it. They're paid a hefty salary for that.

[LKB]

Sign me up...

[hopefullytrusting]

Philocetes aka the bunnies. Something like this:

Adorable.

Here's the avatar I used the longest:



:-D

[Madiel]

I find myself in complete agreement with the view that if you want to be able to personally regulate responses to your posts, the correct format is a blog.

I've made that point in both this forum and other forums I've been involved in, when somebody who has started a thread has tried to strongly act as if they own the thread in some way. Not by locking it, because I think this is the first time I've even heard that the original poster might be able to lock a thread rather than moderators & admins doing it. But I've witnessed other behaviour where someone has really tried to police what others can and cannot say - and I mean beyond wanting people to try to stick to the topic (which is something our moderators encourage anyway).

There are a variety of different forms for putting your views out into the world. Blogs, podcasts, YouTube videos etc, many of them are designed in such a way that you have a primary content creator. Message boards aren't like that, and if someone is trying to regulate a message board as if they're the primary content creator, they've chosen the wrong format for their thoughts.

We've had at least 2 members I can think of who have written substantial blogs and have provided links in threads here to that material.** That seems the right approach, so long as it doesn't degenerate into having a member who contributes nothing to the forum other than links to their blog (and I've seen that happen too).

**PS I should note that the only reason I still have blog links in my signature and info is that something in the forum software refuses to let me change it, it's a bizarre problem. It tells me I"m not allowed to have HTML tags even when I've deleted everything that looks at all like an HTML tag.

[ritter]

The moderators will see to it. They're paid a hefty salary for that.

...plus all the benefits!

[LKB]

Adorable.

Here's the avatar I used the longest:



:-D

Looking at that, I am so hungry.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Adorable.

Here's the avatar I used the longest:



:-D

Yes, now I remember. Good to have you back.

[Gurn Blanston]

The moderators will see to it. They're paid a hefty salary for that.

Hell, I would even come out of retirement!   

[JBS]

I find myself in complete agreement with the view that if you want to be able to personally regulate responses to your posts, the correct format is a blog.

I've made that point in both this forum and other forums I've been involved in, when somebody who has started a thread has tried to strongly act as if they own the thread in some way. Not by locking it, because I think this is the first time I've even heard that the original poster might be able to lock a thread rather than moderators & admins doing it. But I've witnessed other behaviour where someone has really tried to police what others can and cannot say - and I mean beyond wanting people to try to stick to the topic (which is something our moderators encourage anyway).

There are a variety of different forms for putting your views out into the world. Blogs, podcasts, YouTube videos etc, many of them are designed in such a way that you have a primary content creator. Message boards aren't like that, and if someone is trying to regulate a message board as if they're the primary content creator, they've chosen the wrong format for their thoughts.

We've had at least 2 members I can think of who have written substantial blogs and have provided links in threads here to that material.** That seems the right approach, so long as it doesn't degenerate into having a member who contributes nothing to the forum other than links to their blog (and I've seen that happen too).

**PS I should note that the only reason I still have blog links in my signature and info is that something in the forum software refuses to let me change it, it's a bizarre problem. It tells me I"m not allowed to have HTML tags even when I've deleted everything that looks at all like an HTML tag.

As someone who started a couple of the US political threads, I did lock them once or twice when discussions seemed to be too hot.  But it was with the idea of unlocking it after a day or so during which presumably tempers cooled off, and presumed that any of the moderators could unlock it if they felt thread-locking was not necessary or appropriate.

[Karl Henning]

...plus all the benefits!

(* chortle *)

[Papy Oli]

...plus all the benefits!

You managed to get some Boulez play 24/7 in the Moderators' boudoir...? 

[André]

...plus all the benefits!

That pension fund... 🤩

[ritter]

That pension fund... 🤩

...and the free tickets to Salzburg, Bayreuth, Glyndebourne, Ravinia, Tanglewodd, you name it., and the use of the GMG corporate jet to travel there and back. It's actually a relatively decent deal.

[Karl Henning]

...and the free tickets to Salzburg, Bayreuth, Glyndebourne, Ravinia, Tanglewodd, you name it., and the use of the GMG corporate jet to travel there and back. It's actually a relatively decent deal.

The hovercraft is full of eels, though.