Should Forum Moderators Close Polls Arbitrarily?

Ohlmann wrote:

Also, EJ can stifle strong opinions and require only cold logic and data because of the subject they talk about. You can simulate DPS, show data from boss down, and such.

On VEKN, about every discussions are very subjectives, because deck success can't be quantified. And subjectives opinions require more freedom than cold data.

The point being, if we want to talk balance and deck theory, we need the moderation not to be too hard. Elitist jerk is an intersting example, but I believe VEKN is not adapted to it.

(if you want to put it another way, EJ's moderation is not strict because it must ; it is strict because it can)

Noone has suggested a copy paste of EJ's rules and regulations onto this forum. It was brought up as an example to prove that heavy moderation doesn't necessarily lead to "incredibly stifled discussion (third time I have to adress this point even though I think I made it quite clear when posting the link).

henrik wrote:

It was brought up as an example to prove that heavy moderation doesn't necessarily lead to "incredibly stifled discussion (third time I have to adress this point even though I think I made it quite clear when posting the link).

And then again, in EJ the creativity is, while not completely stifled, heavily reduced. It's not a problem because of the subject they talk, but it would be here.

Ohlmann wrote:

And then again, in EJ the creativity is, while not completely stifled, heavily reduced. It's not a problem because of the subject they talk, but it would be here.

I'm not sure what you mean by reduced. Everything relevant to the subject of the forums is being discussed there, and the discussions leads forward to answers.

And yes, imposing identical rules on this forum would probably be bad for the discussion. Fortunatly, noone has suggested that. Having similar rules and moderation here, but of course changed to fit better to the topics, is something that could be discussed though. But that's probably something for another thread in another part of the forums.

henrik wrote:

I do find it irritating to see new threads with the same subject as another, currently used thread. This is where hard moderation would be good. There's no real point in 2+ threads discussing the same thing, there's rather a good point in only having one thread for each discussion since then arguments won't be as easily missed.

Again: Why are you trying to tell people which way to point their discussion?

Your claim that there should only be one thread for all the discussion on a particular topic implies that all the discussion on a particular topic will come about due to the existence of that one thread.

The real world doesn't operate this way. Given that people can be vastly different from one another -- and usually are -- I can't imagine that it's ever been shown to be the best way anywhere, ever. Why should a forum?

henrik wrote:

In the end I guess it depends on what type of forum one wants to have. If it's supposed to be for serious discussions or more for hanging out. Both can surely work, but they end up in different places and while I can see merits in both those place, ultimately I only see myself trying to discuss VtES in one of them.

Your definition of 'hang out' could be -- and likely is -- different from someone else's, so this dichotomy is fairly useless as a point of discussion until you achieve consensus on a definition.

KevinM wrote:

henrik wrote:

I do find it irritating to see new threads with the same subject as another, currently used thread. This is where hard moderation would be good. There's no real point in 2+ threads discussing the same thing, there's rather a good point in only having one thread for each discussion since then arguments won't be as easily missed.

Again: Why are you trying to tell people which way to point their discussion?

Your claim that there should only be one thread for all the discussion on a particular topic implies that all the discussion on a particular topic will come about due to the existence of that one thread.

The real world doesn't operate this way. Given that people can be vastly different from one another -- and usually are -- I can't imagine that it's ever been shown to be the best way anywhere, ever. Why should a forum?

Not sure where the "again" comes from.
Having all discussion on a particular topic in the same thread serves several purposes.
1) Those interested in discussing the topic know where to do so. They have one place to go instead of having to rewrite and/or reread the same arguments to different people in different threads.
2) Those not interested in discussing the topic only have one thread (per topic) to ignore. This makes the forum less cluttered with "boring" topics for them.
3) Those who wants to read about X but not Y won't get mad/bored because the thread titled X is full of people discussing Y.

And no, I don't think all discussion on a particular topic will come out of the existence of that one thread on the topic. I realise that topics can change somewhat, but I think (for everyone's sake) that when such things happen a new thread should be created for that new topic that grew out of an old discussion.


I'm not sure what your "real world" arguments means, to be honest. You'll have to explain it more/better if you want an answer from me on that point.

KevinM wrote:

henrik wrote:

In the end I guess it depends on what type of forum one wants to have. If it's supposed to be for serious discussions or more for hanging out. Both can surely work, but they end up in different places and while I can see merits in both those place, ultimately I only see myself trying to discuss VtES in one of them.

Your definition of 'hang out' could be -- and likely is -- different from someone else's, so this dichotomy is fairly useless as a point of discussion until you achieve consensus on a definition.

Everyone's definitions of any word could be -- and likely are -- different from everybody else's. I thought it was clear that my use of the words "hanging out" was opposed to "having a serious discussion". You can replace "hanging out" with something else ("casually talk", "chitchat") if you think it makes anything better.

Should Forum Mods be allowed to Parity Shift pool away from polls???