Please clarify - why was that discussion locked?

[Bagheera]

Dear Moderators:

I logged in this morning after a couple days to find a lively discussion started by Ranma where people weighed in on multiple sides about their feelings about the present day situation in CDS. I was going to weigh in with my own thoughts but I found the thread locked. I could start a new thread, but it destroys the continuity of the discussion to do so.

I cannot fathom any reason for the thread to have been locked.

Please explain why this thread was locked and/or unlock it please. Thank you.

EDITED to add: Reading that thread made me reconsider running for the RA next term in a positive light, so for me, although the thread started out with a citizen worried about the future of CDS, it inspired me to contribute more... thus, for me, it was a positive thread....and I wanted to reply and explain my thoughts in the context of that thread.

[Bagheera]

For Reference, from the Forum Guidelines:

5.5: A moderator may decide to lock a thread if it has drifted from its original topic, contains posts that are in violation of these guidelines or are in other ways deemed to be detrimental to the purpose of the forums. The moderator will post a message in the thread giving justification for locking the thread.

[Han Held]

I believe Coop locked it because Catz was running around calling names.

If it was my call, I'd open the thread back up, and remove her post (also mine that responded to it) and give her a warning (followed by a ban once she demonstrated she was going to ignore warnings).

But no one likes a back-seat moderator, so I'm gonna support whatever action coop wants to take.

[Bagheera]

I believe Coop locked it because Catz was running around calling names.

If it was my call, I'd open the thread back up, and remove her post (also mine that responded to it) and give her a warning (followed by a ban once she demonstrated she was going to ignore warnings).

But no one likes a back-seat moderator, so I'm gonna support whatever action coop wants to take.

I agree with you, that the more productive course of action would be to open the thread back up and whoever was causing problems, otherwise one gives power to the trouble makers to destroy a conversation.

I now see Coop is new at moderating, so this is intended as constructive criticism in the most positive way.

As for your remark about backseat moderating, you and I see things differently. If it were me, feeling my way in a community, I would welcome the input from others since we all have a voice in this community. If no one speaks up, then there is no feedback for those who have been given the tools.

[Coop]

I now see Coop is new at moderating, so this is intended as constructive criticism in the most positive way.

No Bags, the key is new to moderating HERE. I've been a forum mod for a long time in other places. The thread already had two complaints, it was starting to get Trolly, so I shut it down. The key to putting out fires is to not wait until the flames go to the foundation.

[Bagheera]

I now see Coop is new at moderating, so this is intended as constructive criticism in the most positive way.

No Bags, the key is new to moderating HERE. I've been a forum mod for a long time in other places. The thread already had two complaints, it was starting to get Trolly, so I shut it down. The key to putting out fires is to not wait until the flames go to the foundation.

New to moderating HERE is key, Coop. In most online forums, there exists a benevolent dictatorship. True, the benevolent dictatorship structure is more easy to manage. However, in a democratic forum - which I have a great deal of experience in myself - it is at least (!) if not more, important to not shut down important discussions in response to flash fires which can be isolated and controlled in other ways.

[Han Held]

I now see Coop is new at moderating, so this is intended as constructive criticism in the most positive way.

No Bags, the key is new to moderating HERE. I've been a forum mod for a long time in other places. The thread already had two complaints, it was starting to get Trolly, so I shut it down. The key to putting out fires is to not wait until the flames go to the foundation.

The problem with that approach is that there was legitimate discussion, which has also been shut down ...and, from Catz' point of view, she's won. Now she'll be encouraged to disrupt other threads.

[Tanoujin Milestone]

I have heard Catz received a warning. Her last post was a provocation pointed at Han. I expect the moderation to temporarily ban Catz next time she is looking for a fight but let her have her say as long as she follows the rules.

[Brian Livingston]

I'll post my response here, as the other thread is locked. The original post was:

I am here in the Praetorian, the only person in the CDS. Oh wait another has joined me in CN.

I am not sure if the 22-October-2016 meeting will happen. Two of the members are boycotting meetings and another is ill.

The CDS is a set of museum sims without life. I remember the old days when 2 people gathered tougher, there would soon be a group. Today our Republic lies empty most of the time. When something has lost its meaning it is best to let it go. The CDS has outlasted it will to continue.

I think the time has come to end the CDS government and consider the experiment a failure. I propose a vote by the RA to disband the CDS while there is still a functioning government. I propose to disband the CDS government and turn over the sims to Sudane for disposal. If the people wish to continue a part of the CDS it should be run by Sudane as any other landlord estate.

This is a complicated problem - What is the role of government when there are no pressing needs beyond paying the bills - no war, no hunger, no meaningful strife. Why bother to exist?

It's a fair question... but I think the answer is that we are unshackled from any of the burdens that drag us down - the bigger question is what are we going to do with our unbridled attention? I think we need to refocus our efforts (and, I say this as a hypocrite, popping in once a month at best) to promoting our best - our rich history, culture, arts, and democracy. While the lack of interest is a little disappointing, democratic rule is admittedly pretty unsexy, so I am not surprised that folks are not clamoring at the bit to review legislation and debate the merits of Robert's Rules. However, democracy is in our genes - from our days on the mainland to splitting off to an island to our own, to expansion from one sim to two... to three... and beyond. We merged. We separated. And yet we have survived. That is our story, it is a story that we are not telling adequately, and yet is a story that continues to be written.

All this said, these are just my humble thoughts...

Respectfully,

Brian

[Catz Jewell]

I wasnt starting a fight. Just stating the obvious.

[Han Held]

...and, from Catz' point of view, she's won. Now she'll be encouraged to disrupt other threads.

I rest my case (see attached):

[Catz Jewell]

Sorry I was bored. Love messing with you CDS nutcases.

[Han Held]

to guard against deletion or ninja edits:

[Kate Amdahl]

Catz, we nutcases are perfectly capable of messing with each other without assistance!

Would it be gauche for me to ask Catz to be banned from the forum now?

[Han Held]

Catz, we nutcases are perfectly capable of messing with each other without assistance!

Would it be gauche for me to ask Catz to be banned from the forum now?

People are too quick to say "don't feed the trolls", but in this case it really is apt.

If she's bored let her find entertainment elsewhere.

The SC knows what's up -let them deal with it in their quiet way.