Sarah Palin thread locked

Folks,
the Sarah Palin thread has been locked due to the political overtones. Bill, Nancy & I agree that it has gone beyond the Coc and is under review in the moderator forum.

I thought this notice was supposed to be posted in the original thread, were the action was taken... As it is now, members will go to the original post and find the thread lock.."for no reason"...

Hey, I'm typing as fast as I can. There's a notice over there now. Ned had to get to bed. (Heaven knows he needs his beauty rest. Me, on the other hand...no amount of rest could fix.)

Just delete it. No big deal, I can go back to being in love with Tiffany Amber Thieseen easy enough.

PS: No political overtones were meant. I just thought she is very pretty.

I dunno 'bout that decision. Calling it political seems a gigantic stretch IMHO.
BTW, when I married, I promised to be faithful, not blind. I like looking at attractive women. And do.

It's impossible to talk about Sara Palin without political overtones. At least until after Nov 4.

Same is true for the other major candidates.

Mike

Frank Fusco said:

I dunno 'bout that decision. Calling it political seems a gigantic stretch IMHO.
BTW, when I married, I promised to be faithful, not blind. I like looking at attractive women. And do.

Click to expand...

Frank, there were comments -- now deleted by their posters or at their request -- that did step into the political vein. They were posted with humorous intent, but they were still a bit outside the lines we've established.

Anything, even a joke, that makes one candidate look better than another can be interpreted as political, and has the potential of escalating into a more heated argument (or counter-jokes).

There are lots of places on the Internet to share Obama or Palin or McCain or Biden jokes...here, we really just don't want the potential problems that come with them.

Vaughn McMillan said:

Frank, there were comments -- now deleted by their posters or at their request -- that did step into the political vein. They were posted with humorous intent, but they were still a bit outside the lines we've established.

Anything, even a joke, that makes one candidate look better than another can be interpreted as political, and has the potential of escalating into a more heated argument (or counter-jokes).

There are lots of places on the Internet to share Obama or Palin or McCain or Biden jokes...here, we really just don't want the potential problems that come with them.

Click to expand...

OK, can't debate something I didn't see. Accept decision on faith in mods.

Thanks, Vaughn

Greg Cook said:

Still can't see a notice at the bottom of the original thread...

http://familywoodworking.org/forums/showthread.php?t=11133

Click to expand...

You were the only member who brought up the question in nearly 24 hours, but I posted a notice for you. There is no specific set of steps in the CoC or Moderator Guidelines for locking a thread, so there is no specific requirement for a notice to be posted.

BTW, there was a notice, as described in the Mod Guidelines, posted as a placeholder when the offending post was removed for editing. (Nothing in the rules about posting to the end of the thread.) That notice was deleted when the OP requested his entire post to be removed.

Vaughn said:

You were the only member who brought up the question in nearly 24 hours, but I posted a notice for you.

Click to expand...

I may have been the only member to post a question on the notice issue, but probably not the only member to "question" why the thread was suddenly locked.... I'm sure they appreciate the notice you posted as well.

Vaughn said:

BTW, there was a notice, as described in the Mod Guidelines, posted as a placeholder when the offending post was removed for editing. (Nothing in the rules about posting to the end of the thread.) That notice was deleted when the OP requested his entire post to be removed.

Click to expand...

If the notice was not required, why was a separate thread started, this one, stating what had happened and who decided to take the action? The words used are almost same wording used when a post was under review and a decision had been made. (placing a notice at the end of the thread that has been locked....can't be replied to...is common sense, IMO)

Vaughn said:

There is no specific set of steps in the CoC or Moderator Guidelines for locking a thread, so there is no specific requirement for a notice to be posted.

Click to expand...

Maybe a specific set of steps needs to be established then...

Since the rare action of locking the thread was taken, and the initial notice of why the mods were reviewing the post was deleted, it seems like simple common sense to post a notice similar to what you finally posted, at the end of the original thread. Members that see the thread later will have a better idea what happened, and not feel that threads here can just "get locked" like other forums, no?

Greg Cook said:

...If the notice was not required, why was a separate thread started, this one, stating what had happened and who decided to take the action? ...

Click to expand...

It was 2:00 in the morning. Ned was tired. I have no idea why he started a second thread, but don't see why it's such a problem. It's a woodworking forum, not a regulatory commission. The world wasn't gonna stop turning because a thread was locked.

Greg Cook said:

Maybe a specific set of steps needs to be established then...

Since the rare action of locking the thread was taken, and the initial notice of why the mods were reviewing the post was deleted, it seems like simple common sense to post a notice similar to what you finally posted, at the end of the original thread. Members that see the thread later will have a better idea what happened, and not feel that threads here can just "get locked" like other forums, no?

Click to expand...

Point taken, but on the other hand, we currently have so many rules and steps and guidelines that I doubt anyone can claim they know them all. Adding more isn't necessarily the answer. You and I both know the Mods (and Admins, for that matter), are expected to be able to make some judgment calls along the way.

Who said anything about the world stopping? I didn't say anything about a problem of locking the thread.... I asked a simple question about the placement of a mod's notice regarding action taken on a thread... You replied shortly after, that a note had been placed on the thread... I thought...end of problem.

A day later, when I noticed there was no note explaining what had happened, I posted that here again... Shortly after that, you posted one on the thread, so I changed my post to simply "thanks, Vaughn" and again thought "end of problem" until your next post...

There are some rules and procedures that we made up when the forum was established, knowing full well that changes and additions would probably be needed. I don't think they are excessive...

A simple addition (in bold) to an existing procedure should solve the problem for current and future new mods.

"For either edited or removed posts, the reason for the action will be noted in the “Reason for editing” field, as well as the names of the Moderators who made the decision. For posts being locked, the reason for the action, as well as the names of the Moderators who made the decision, will be noted in a final post, just before the thread is locked."

My concern throughout this "conversation" has been that a serious mod action was taken on a thread with no explanation left for members to read and understand why. Simply moving the first post here to the original thread would have solved the problem...

An explanation is there now..... Thanks!

i thought that actually "locking" a thread was something that was to be avoided at all costs?........kinda like banning a member.
mistakes are unavoidable and are to be expected of anybody who does something......
i know i`ve been hit-n-miss lately and haven`t been privy to the discussions behind the scenes so maybe it`s now okay to lock threads that are controversial?
if things haven`t changed, and my addled memory is on page, might it be a good idea to reopen the original thread and merge this one with it?

Tod, I think it was "deleting" a thread with no explanation that was the "avoid at all costs" issue.

Greg, your suggestions are noted. I'll let the Mods do with this thread whatever they want. I'm done with it.