When bad threads rear their ugly head.

[slipstrike0159]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

Well in some cases CT as a whole is a place for people to gain respect and one day be modded not just specifically this thread. If you think about it, the people who become mods are the ones who are the most level headed logical thinking ones (for the most part =P) and the place that has the biggest concentration of potential candidates is CT.

Also, why do you think CT needs a new mod anyway? I think for the most part things that need to be controlled usually do in a timely fashion with the current mods. The only reason i can figure to making someone else a mod is just to take on some of the load so that people like Guido can take a break every so often.

I dunno, i just kind of like to have conversations and debates with intelligent people. It is more stimulating after going to a high school full of morons who cant carry on a conversation that wont eventually lead up to gossip.

EDIT: Now that i think about it, CT may not get as much traffic as CC, but there are definitely more than a handful of areas that get less people posting in it.

[devonin]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

I imagine some of it has to do with the fact that Guido, Jewpin et al are all 'super moderators' and thus have other mod duties outside the CT forum, functionally having to be a party to managing the entire forum, whereas a 'Critical Thinking Mod' who only had work to do in here, would be able to do so in a much more timely and effective way.

That said, I don't necessarily know that CT needs more mods. Guido on his own does a fantastic job, and other mods can and do help out. What -I- at least was getting at was a desire for a more efficient way to deal with stuff that shouldn't be in CT other than just Private Messaging a mod who may very well see the problem before they read the PM, and to just try and urge the CT readers in general to be a little more careful to not give in to the temptation to jump on someone making an off-forum post.

I still think the best way to stop people from making idiotic postwhoring threads about nonsense is to just let the thread sit there, empty and unresponded, until a mod comes along and locks it.

[fido123]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

I can understand why we should and do punish people who post a sarcastic comment or whatever. I did it once at got banned with some 1 sentance thread and I said "tl;dr" sarcasticaly. But ya I understand why I got banned. It just keeps bumping a crap post when it should jst be left to die.

[tsugomaru]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

I don't hang around CT enough to know if bumping a month old debate is a major offense, but I do know that's not why people get banned for posting "tl;dr" or "bump" posts. It's because they aren't contributing anything to the topic and that's an offense.

~Tsugomaru

[devonin]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

In fact, I doublechecked early on, about the policy of bumping threads in CT compared to the rest of the website.

The answer I recieved was functionally: "We know that CT moves a lot more slowly than other subfora, so as long as your bump adds something new and relevant to the discussion, you should absolutely bump the older discussion over starting a new one"

But idiotic "quote the first post, and say "Yes I agree"" bumping nonsense should be (and is, as far as I've sen) just as bad here as it is elsewhere, if not more so.