Steve001 Wrote:Oh, you don't remember SandyB clearly. Note nearly every thread she starts is moderated.
No, that's true, I don't remember her initially. I realised that I'd confused her with someone else and altered my post above accordingly. The rest I stand by.
(2019-07-24, 10:45 PM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]I suddenly find that we’re now apparently locking threads.
Are threads now owned by opening posters? Such that the thread stays visible and readable on the forums, but no one else can post to it... to correct say, an error, or rebut some claimed fact... even those who may also have contributed to the thread?
This seems a distasteful, and somewhat bizarre state of affairs for psience to adopt, where the whole principle of the site was to avoid this sort of moderation? And instead allow people to comment where and how they like?
I’m perfectly happy for people to own their own content, and in the past, people have asked to have their content deleted... and that has been the way these sorts of issues have been resolved in the past.
Can we have a serious rethink about this?
I've been on forums where OPs have the ability to lock their own threads, for whatever reasons they have. It has some merits as a system, on sites meant to be more carefully moderated where mods are AWOL and threads derail, but I wouldn't say it's a great idea for a place like this.
I do think that asking for a thread to be locked isn't wholly unreasonable, if it's gone too far south; someone can always try a new thread on the same/similar subject down the road, and hopefully circumstances work out differently. But as the thread that prompted all this is back open, it's a moot point for now.
(2019-07-26, 01:16 AM)tim Wrote: [ -> ]Post 24 where?
I'm guessing:
https://psiencequest.net/forums/thread-l...9#pid30499
Note: one of the quirks of the MyBB software used for this forum is that posts get renumbered sometimes.
It is best to use the full link to the post instead, I think we've found.
Typoz Wrote:I'm guessing:
https://psiencequest.net/forums/thread-l...9#pid30499
Note: one of the quirks of the MyBB software used for this forum is that posts get renumbered sometimes.
It is best to use the full link to the post instead, I think we've found.
Hi, Typoz
That link just returns me to this thread
(2019-07-26, 09:03 AM)tim Wrote: [ -> ]Hi, Typoz
That link just returns me to this thread
Yes, that's right. It is a link to a specific post in this thread. Of course if you scroll up or scroll down you may not be sure which post is intended. When you first click the link, it should start with one of your own posts at the top of the window.
Perhaps quoting from that thread may help:
(2019-07-25, 10:43 PM)tim Wrote: [ -> ]What was wrong with the original Skeptiko forum ?
However. I don't know whether this is the one referenced by the earlier comment, I am guessing, as I already said
Typoz Wrote:Yes, that's right. It is a link to a specific post in this thread. Of course if you scroll up or scroll down you may not be sure which post is intended. When you first click the link, it should start with one of your own posts at the top of the window.
Perhaps quoting from that thread may help:
However. I don't know whether this is the one referenced by the earlier comment, I am guessing, as I already said
That's Post 19. Wonder why did Steve 001 said post 24.
(2019-07-26, 09:49 AM)tim Wrote: [ -> ]That's Post 19. Wonder why did Steve 001 said post 24.
Again, yes. As I said, it is one of the quirks of the forum software. Posts can be re-numbered under some circumstances. Usually somewhere earlier in the thread one or several posts have been deleted and this means the deleted post(s) may or may not be included in the post number.
I wish there was a simple solution, but it seems best to consider post numbers as unreliable and not use them as a means of identification.
(Laird may understand this more clearly than I do).