<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(gregor @ Nov 21 2006, 01:51 PM) [snapback]267993[/snapback]</div>
Quote:
|
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tulac @ Nov 21 2006, 02:37 PM) [snapback]267989[/snapback]
|
Quote:
Although such topics are interesting to read. *grabs popcorn*
[/b]
|
Indeed. Just sit back, relax and read the bickering...
[/b][/quote]
Unless you've seen around 12 internet dramas already... <_<
On topic (although it's probably fairly pointless, at this stage):
Disclaimer: Having modded a couple of "difficult" boards myself, I tend to side with admins and mods on these issues.
Polling people for thread locking, bannings, assorted administravia doesn't work. Saw one board try it, it's closed. Saw another board try be "democratic" by allowing moderator elections: closed. If people are determined to complain about a board incessantly, they usually do, regardless of what they're given.
Whilst boards that operate somehwhere between dictatorship and representative oligarchy (like this one) just deal with these people and keep going.
That said, locking a thread doesn't need to be the be all and end all of it's existence. You can have the mod/admin whatever who's online lock a questionable thread, and then discuss it (and possibly re-open it) with the other staff members, so all points of view within the board administration are accounted for.