Should mods make a post to justify why they locked a thread?

[NeuroticFish]

It shouldn't only limited to reason why they lock the topic.

It also needs:
1. Explanation why someone post got deleted.
2. Notification to non-original poster when the topic from original poster got deleted.
3. Different logo for locked thread (locked by OP and locked by moderator).
4. Hyperlink to the reported post when someone got banned.
5. Explanation why moderator mark your report as bad.

It would be nice, but it would mean quite an amount of extra work for them and also for somebody adding new features to this forum (which some would call pointless since this one was meant to be replaced by the new-forum-software; but I no longer believe/expect that)

And somehow, you people, seem to take into account the few of your topics/posts and forget about the sheer number of spam posts from people or bots who will not care at all about the feedback.
I will also tell that some years ago I could have agreed with this. But now I know that in time you can learn to see the signs for "what was the reason".

[LoyceV]

I don't remember any of my topics ever being locked by a Mod, but I do think you have a point: if a spam megathread is locked because it's a spam megathread, it might be good for users to see. Then again, most of them were deleted, and there's no notification for anyone other than the OP.

[Lucius]

The only reason for a thread to be locked is " There's nothing more to discuss further ", so I guess someone reported that to mod and they took the action or atleast that's what my assumption about locking threads by mod.
~snip~

If you had read at least a few posts in this topic, then you wouldn't have guessed what happened - too many people only read the titles and the first post in the topic, and that's why their posts look like yours.

Not wanting to call into question the analysis you made, I ask:
Why does a topic have to be closed, just because you think everything has already been discussed on the subject?

Looking at the topic you gave as an example. The topic has 10 pages, I can read the OP and the following two or three pages, and be interested in saying something about it. Maybe even ask something. What would be the problem if I made a post, 10 pages after the debate?
You will say that the answer to my question or the point I wanted to highlight has already been mentioned before. Yes, it may be true, but that's no reason for me not to be able to express myself.

Based on what you wrote, do you think that repetitive content is completely acceptable and that regardless of what someone wrote before you, you have some sort of "right" to express yourself and repeat it in your own way? No offense, but I didn't expect such an answer from someone like you.

In addition, the topic has 12 pages.

[joker_josue]

Based on what you wrote, do you think that repetitive content is completely acceptable and that regardless of what someone wrote before you, you have some sort of "right" to express yourself and repeat it in your own way? No offense, but I didn't expect such an answer from someone like you.

In addition, the topic has 12 pages.

It doesn't offend me, we are just analyzing the situation from several perspectives.

The fact that someone explains the same thing in a different way does not mean that they are repeating it. It can bring a different perspective on the subject, highlight a point that was not highlighted before and other details. And this other way of analyzing the topic can bring other points to the debate that have never been mentioned before.

What I mean by this is that for me it makes more sense to eliminate posts that are spamming (or repeating what has already been said in a clear way, without adding anything), than closing the topic.

Regarding big topics, it all depends on the topic. It should always be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. There are cases where a topic can get very large, but never be a source of spam. But this usually only works in local tabs, with smaller communities.

[Mrbluntzy]

I know sometimes mods lock threads at their own discression, especially at boards where they are a local moderator. At least when s thread gets moved there's some forum notice being posted. But for locking a topic there's nothing to signify it was a moderator action.

I just think it would be a nice courtesy if mods would just add a post before locking a topic to justify why they felt it should be locked. It's good to put this info on the record for future reference. And also from what I understand, since the OP can unlock a topic locked by a mod, a post by the staff member that took the action would prevent misunderstandings.

Yea, I support what you have said alani123. The OP of a topic have the right to lock their topic, a moderator also have the right to lock a thread for a good reason that is best known to them but before moderators must lock a topic of another OP, they should state a reason below the topic, so that users and the OP can know the reason why the topic was locked. If the moderators does not also keep a reason for locking a topic, the OP can send them DM to ask why the topic was locked.

[Mr.suevie]

Based on what you wrote, do you think that repetitive content is completely acceptable and that regardless of what someone wrote before you, you have some sort of "right" to express yourself and repeat it in your own way? No offense, but I didn't expect such an answer from someone like you.

In addition, the topic has 12 pages.

It doesn't offend me, we are just analyzing the situation from several perspectives.

The fact that someone explains the same thing in a different way does not mean that they are repeating it. It can bring a different perspective on the subject, highlight a point that was not highlighted before and other details. And this other way of analyzing the topic can bring other points to the debate that have never been mentioned before.

What I mean by this is that for me it makes more sense to eliminate posts that are spamming (or repeating what has already been said in a clear way, without adding anything), than closing the topic.

Regarding big topics, it all depends on the topic. It should always be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. There are cases where a topic can get very large, but never be a source of spam. But this usually only works in local tabs, with smaller communities.

A perfect example of what you talking about would be this particular thread in speculation BUY THE DIP AND HODL. For sometime it feels as if the whole discussion is being repeated over and over again but if you just tend to keen in closely you will actually get that sometimes most of the repeated talks convey new info that needs be debated by others and that's why the thread itself is still powering till date although I won't lie sometimes it feels like deja Vu (feeling that you read same thing over and over 😁)

[Findingnemo]

The only reason for a thread to be locked is " There's nothing more to discuss further ", so I guess someone reported that to mod and they took the action or atleast that's what my assumption about locking threads by mod.
~snip~

If you had read at least a few posts in this topic, then you wouldn't have guessed what happened - too many people only read the titles and the first post in the topic, and that's why their posts look like yours.

You know what, I read all the replies and decided to make this as my reply along with an added opinion. I mean it's just simple and obvious if a thread is locked and AFAIK no one highlighted that point in this thread so I did.

I have never seen any mod giving any sort of explanation for a locked thread until they have been asked here in meta.

[philipma1957]

I don't remember any of my topics ever being locked by a Mod, but I do think you have a point: if a spam megathread is locked because it's a spam megathread, it might be good for users to see. Then again, most of them were deleted, and there's no notification for anyone other than the OP.

Yeah I would think a mod could lock and pick from a list of why the lock

1. super spam
2. threats of violence
3. other

obvious the list could be longer but the effort to pick one of 3 or 4 or 5 on the list is pretty much zero.  the effort to lock is much more as the mod has to read a few or more than a few posts to decide if thread should be lock.  so adding a reason from a predetermined list is not much to ask for.

[Mia Chloe]

Yeah I would think a mod could lock and pick from a list of why the lock

1. super spam
2. threats of violence
3. other

obvious the list could be longer but the effort to pick one of 3 or 4 or 5 on the list is pretty much zero.  the effort to lock is much more as the mod has to read a few or more than a few posts to decide if thread should be lock.  so adding a reason from a predetermined list is not much to ask for.

Exactly what I was trying to say in my previous reply.
Instead of saying mods should start threads or topics with respect to their actions on a particular post like ( Nuking, moving or locking.) there should be a feed back message the mods should select during the process of taking their actions. Probably something like this post was nuked because of spam or this post was nuked by this mod because of suspected scam. So on and so forth.

So any one who is not satisfied with the action of the mod can be free to step up and create a reputation thread asking why his post was nuked or moved as the case may be. However from my experience on the forum, posts that are usually nuked are just too obviously off topic or scam.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

For obvious spam/low quality posts= Lock/delete without explanation.

For duplicate topics= Lock with a link to the original discussion thread.

@OP, the quote above better describes what I wanted to say.

Moderators can not just lock or delete a topic when nothing is wrong.

If a post gets deleted or lock, it is obviouse that it might have been because of the reasons that @Igebotz has given, which moderators will not really find the strength to start explaining why they want to lock a topic.  It is left for the  OP and other readers to figure out why the topic got locked.

[uchegod-21]

I know sometimes mods lock threads at their own discression, especially at boards where they are a local moderator. At least when s thread gets moved there's some forum notice being posted. But for locking a topic there's nothing to signify it was a moderator action.

I just think it would be a nice courtesy if mods would just add a post before locking a topic to justify why they felt it should be locked. It's good to put this info on the record for future reference. And also from what I understand, since the OP can unlock a topic locked by a mod, a post by the staff member that took the action would prevent misunderstandings.

• If a mod locks a topic and the OP is not comfortable with it, it is the duty of the Op to create another post asking why their post was locked.
• Moderator writing the last post before locking a thread is a nice suggestion. But moderation is best when you don't know who moderated you. A moderator making such a post before locking will expose him to everyone that he's the who locked the thread.
• Since you corrected yourself, a user cannot unlock a post locked by a mod.

[SmartGold01]

Already if a post is being locked then op should know that is only mod or admin that can lock a post and this implies either the post doesn't meet the quality or that post has been subsequently discussed over time so when a member create a post that looks same the next is for them to get it locked without prior noticed to the op or even without making any comment to attached to their reason of locking the thread or topic. Moving a  post is common especially when that post is created in the field where it's not needed, and if you are using bitcointalk telegram bot then you would get notified for the moved only if you enable notification for that particular board its being moved to.

[alani123]

I don't remember any of my topics ever being locked by a Mod, but I do think you have a point: if a spam megathread is locked because it's a spam megathread, it might be good for users to see. Then again, most of them were deleted, and there's no notification for anyone other than the OP.

Maybe you didn't notice because there's absolutely no way the user gets notified.
Bitcointalk is lacking many quality of life features that any social site should have these days. But some things could be done as moderation courtesy too.

At least deleted threads send the OP a personal message automatically.

[Sandra_hakeem]

I know sometimes mods lock threads at their own discression, especially at boards where they are a local moderator.

Not at their own discretion though.... that's like saying they're responsible for adjudicating what should,and what shouldn't be posted. We've got rules already; so basically, the moderators are only there to blur out/control incessant posting.

I just think it would be a nice courtesy if mods would just add a post before locking a topic to justify why they felt it should be locked

Is this really necessary?? Ofcourse, when a post is deleted, a user gets notified through PMS for the possible reasons that happened. The same case would imply when it's locked by the MODs.

Look, you have no idea how much time and energy it takes to manually run the forum. Why not avoid tryna make their job more strenuous?

[Xal0lex]

I have never seen any mod giving any sort of explanation for a locked thread until they have been asked here in meta.

It seems that you do not visit all sections of the forum.

[R1dwanRz]

I know sometimes mods lock threads at their own discression, especially at boards where they are a local moderator. At least when s thread gets moved there's some forum notice being posted. But for locking a topic there's nothing to signify it was a moderator action.

I just think it would be a nice courtesy if mods would just add a post before locking a topic to justify why they felt it should be locked. It's good to put this info on the record for future reference. And also from what I understand, since the OP can unlock a topic locked by a mod, a post by the staff member that took the action would prevent misunderstandings.

A note would be fine by me, cos how can you find out what you did that made mods lock your thread? But nevertheless, if you know the rules of the forum, so in the first place, you wouldn't had that thread locked. Although you can find out the reason from your PMs, which is enough info to know.

Otherwise, you would DM mod and ask the reason, cos that is more communicative.

[EarnOnVictor]

I know sometimes mods lock threads at their own discression, especially at boards where they are a local moderator. At least when s thread gets moved there's some forum notice being posted. But for locking a topic there's nothing to signify it was a moderator action.

I just think it would be a nice courtesy if mods would just add a post before locking a topic to justify why they felt it should be locked. It's good to put this info on the record for future reference. And also from what I understand, since the OP can unlock a topic locked by a mod, a post by the staff member that took the action would prevent misunderstandings.

You raised a very good point and I hope I am not yet late for the party. I also read what so many people wrote here which now makes me confused about whether moderators have the right to lock and unlock a thread or not, which is against what I believed initially, and I know that many also believed that moderators have that power as well and not only the admin.

Regardless, just like what PowerGlove pointed out here, any action made by any moderate or any high ranking persons on the forum who can do what other ordinary members can't do should not just be but also the reason for the action.

This is not only to allege/sanction the users but also for such users to know and avoid it next time. Some actions could be confusing at times, so what use is it if the person redo it if he didn't know what was wrong with the initial one?

[Maus0728]

If that was the case, they would probably not meet their quota and they're going to take a really long time to lock all the thread that needs to be locked, maybe if there's a way that mods can do an automated message for the reason for locking the thread, it might work but for now, we just have to rely on self-reflection as to why our threads have been locked.

[dkbit98]

I had my some of my topics locked by moderators or admins several times before, but I was not really that interested in getting written explanation why it happened.
Most of the times I can guess why this happened, I probably asked some tricky questions or topic was going nowhere or off-topic.
I wouldn't waste my time on that anymore, unless it was something really important.

[robelneo]

For obvious spam/low quality posts= Lock/delete without explanation.

For duplicate topics= Lock with a link to the original discussion thread.

@OP, the quote above better describes what I wanted to say.

Moderators can not just lock or delete a topic when nothing is wrong.

If a post gets deleted or lock, it is obviouse that it might have been because of the reasons that @Igebotz has given, which moderators will not really find the strength to start explaining why they want to lock a topic.  It is left for the  OP and other readers to figure out why the topic got locked.

I agree, If the moderator has to explain why he locked the thread, he will be put in the spotlight for his decision. He will have to defend all the reasons why he locked the topic since we already know the rules on this forum and have ideas on why the moderators locked the topic.
The moderator's job is to implement the rules on locking the topic based on his judgment, and he has the discretion to do that. It's a moderator's privilege.