Locking Threads

[ShelbyMotorsports]

Just the other day I was thinking that I need to make a post thanking the TM mods for not being so quick on locking certain threads especially after seeing a similar thread get locked on TD.com

Well I didn't get a chance to make that post and this morning what do I see but another thread being locked here on TM.com

There's no sense debating the reason the thread should or shouldn't have been locked but again I ask why can't the mod that locks the thread post that they are the one that locked it?

These anonymous thread lockings are what lead to suspicions of favoritism towards some members/vendors over others.

It did seem for a time when a thread was locked that the locking mod was being upfront by posting when and why they locked the thread. Can we not continue this or is there a reason that this practice was stopped?

[GLHSKEN]

The thread in question was locked by Frank. Why, because I posted in the admin section that I was disgusted by the behaviour of our own mods on the sister thread on TD.com.

This was the absolute wrong behaviour by anyone associated with this board. It allowed people to take (deserved) shots at this boards leaders. I do NOT think that will happen again or there will be a SHAKE-up here.

Edited to add... This had spilled over into a statement regarding the national SDAC attendance. This was in NO WAY related to SDAC. We did not want to censer the comments, but the direction the thread was taking was WAY off TRACK

[ShelbyMotorsports]

Ken

I saw that comment about SDAC and probably like most folks I was a little puzzled why one members disappointment with a cylinder head purchase would cause another person not involved with the purchase to say something about SDAC.

Between censoring that persons post or locking the thread I guess locking the thread was the better choice.

Perhaps temporarily locking a thread could be a solution. When the mods agree that any thread is getting heated why not lock it temporarily for say 24-48 hours to give everyone a chance to cool down and comeback calmer.

Kind of a time-out or better yet a Turbo Cool Down Time Out.

Just a thought.

Steve

[slasky]

I think that thread had run its course. both sides had presented their side. People had already made up their minds and would not be swayed over to the other side. Had it been left open it would not have solved the initial problem. It would have just created more problems.
In some cases I would agree that a "cool down time" would be a good Idea. Just not for that thread.

[GLHS592]

I kept up with that thread because I wanted to see what the head flowed. What I can't understand is how someone associates SDAC and TM.com members with idiots. I don't recall but maybe a handful of people acting immature. It was just a few people involved or did I miss something? I don't visit TD.com much anymore, so maybe I did.

[Russ Jerome]

The thread in question was locked by Frank. Why, because I posted in the admin section that I was disgusted by the behaviour of our own mods on the sister thread on TD.com.

This was the absolute wrong behaviour by anyone associated with this board. It allowed people to take (deserved) shots at this boards leaders. I do NOT think that will happen again or there will be a SHAKE-up here.

Edited to add... This had spilled over into a statement regarding the national SDAC attendance. An individual had merged crap on the boards and took a shot at SDAC. This was in NO WAY related to SDAC. We did not want to censer the comments, but the direction the thread was taking was WAY off TRACK

The member you are talking about in no way meant to take a SHOT at SDAC. He supports and is proud to be a paying member of SDAC.

He is disappointed in the way people behaved on the Lonewolf thread on TD and TM. That is all.

He does not have a hidden agenda nor does he dislike anyone on any side of the disagreement.

He asked everyone to stop with the personal bashing. It continued.

He asked that only people involved post. Everyone with a computer chimed in to stir the pot.

He was upset with the way people treated each other. Plain and simple. I have seen him struggle with this and get so angry with the way people were replying to each other.

He has no idea that I am writing this, so take it as you will. I as his wife, resent the statement above. This man starts talking about “next year’s SDAC,” the minute he pulls in the driveway from the current year.
He is the one to remind me that his SDAC dues are due and to make sure that there is money in the paypal
account so that he can pay because he is late. He would NEVER make disparaging remarks against this organization.

It is amazing to me that your statement above is what you “got “ from his post.
Because of the Lonewolf thread , he was ashamed at SOME of the people that would be at the event, not the event itself. The people who were personally bashing each other, the ones who posted to stir the pot, and the people who posted on one board knowing they would never post like that or allow such posts on other boards.

He loves the turbo-dodge community and the cars and is forever helping some young kid do something to his “new” turbo dodge car that he just picked up. In fact I used to joke that unless we started a sentence with turbo we would never be able to get his attention. I used to wish my first name was turbo. Lol.

Once again, he does not know I am writing this ( I am sure he will find out, lol) and he can fight his own battles, but I felt something had to be said and I hope this does not stir any more pots.

I know he encourages everyone in his car group to become members of SDAC and to go to the SDAC national convention in PA.

Thanks for your time.

[sdac guy]

I kept up with that thread because I wanted to see what the head flowed. What I can't understand is how someone associates SDAC and TM.com members with idiots. I don't recall but maybe a handful of people acting immature. It was just a few people involved or did I miss something? I don't visit TD.com much anymore, so maybe I did.The nastiness is all still on TD in locked threads. The first thread there got locked and someone not associated with the deal started a new thread on a lark, as a joke. That one also became a little tense and it got locked (both locked by the new owner of the board). So the conversation moved to this board. The thread here remained fairly civil until the threads on TD got locked. So, that's the history.

Moving on to Russ' comment of including a reference to SDAC in his post ....

I can certainly understand Russ' SDAC comment in his posting here. It was only a statement of disgust with this entire situation (and the folks involved). I saw it as that, and in my posting only tried to smooth his ruffled feathers, calm him down some, and show that it is not as dire as he might have felt when he wrote what he did.

I tried to be careful not to blow what he said out of proportion in my reply. But I also know there are others that are as fed up with the bickering on this and the other board as Russ & I am. In the heat of the postings on the other board, I was ready to say, screw these boards SDAC doesn't need this aggravation (more or less the same attitude Russ expressed here). I was disgusted by the bickering going on, especially by folks that had no first hand knowledge of the deal and were just spouting opinions, and also by the mods from here that completely lost sight of any impartialness, and sometimes even common decency. While it happend on TD, it made both boards look bad. And that to me is a problem.

Nothing good for the community came out of those threads. I know Russ and exactly where he (and the Mrs) are coming from on this. When Russ was ready to quit being a mod on TD a while back, I asked him to reconsider as he was really needed there. Thankfully he stayed on there as a mod. So here I find myself again asking Russ to put aside his disgust with the situation at hand, but this time, for others to do so also.

Mrs Jerome,
I am so sorry that you had to interrupt your day to reply to a situation on this board that so far has not been handled very well. Please accept my apology, and pass my regards on to Russ.

Respectfully submitted,

Barry

[GLHSKEN]

My apologies Mrs Jerome. Your points are well taken.

[Whorse]

This case was a deal gone wrong, and I think it would've been a lot better handled if it was treated like that, where only the person posting the complaint and the person in question could reply. I couldn't refrain from making a stupid comment, even though I was just pointing out something that would really bother me if I was involved. I'm sure I'm not alone. In the end, it would probably work out better to do that in these situations.

[GLHSKEN]

This thread is not intended to continue that discussion path. Let's keep it that way. The thread was closed for 2 fold reasons. It was serving no purpose.

[turbovanman²]

The member you are talking about in no way meant to take a SHOT at SDAC.

Unfortunatly, thats the way it came across. :(

I am sorry for adding my 2 cent on the thread at hand but it was just so out of control, it really didn't need to be that complicated. Anyhow, lets hope we all learned something and keep building fast cars/vans and having a good time, :nod:

Yes, it was locked and from now on, if a thread is locked, we'll post a reason why.

[glhs727]

Getting back to the original topic posted by shelbymotorsports:
I have no issue with a thread being locked, unlocked, whatever, but I DO think that whenever a mod takes an action like that (especially since it is a pretty rare occurence) they should add a statement to the thread explaining who locked it and why. It could be as simply as : this thread is being locked because it has taken a turn for the worse" or "it's being locked because parties NOT inlvolved keep posting and adding nothing constructive"
This way no one jumps to some silly conclusion that may be so off base it's ridiculous, and then gets all riled, starts new threads, cancels memberships, stops going to sdac events etc....
later,
Cindy

[sdac guy]

Since Steve's question seemed to get lost early on in this thread, I brought it up again in the admin forum this morning. It was the practice here early on to post such notices when threads were locked, and also I think we used to notify folks involved when their posts or threads were deleted. Somehow this habit got lost, and should now be reinstated (as Simon pointed out a couple posts back).

To be fair to all, and to satisfy some curiosity surrounding the issue. After Russ posted in the LWP thread here and made an offhand reference to SDAC events, someone brought it to my attention and asked if I felt there was 1) a need to address the issue, and 2) if this attitude could be widespread.

Since I had already viewed the LWP threads on TD as possibly being detrimental to SDAC-17 attendance, and at the very least probably providing some tense moments between different folks attending, I decided to respond to Russ' post and try to head off a new track of discussion in that thread.

My comments were very measured as I did not want to blow the situation out of proportion. But to keep further discussion from evolving, and since the LWP thread had apparently run it's course on both boards, I requested the thread be locked after my posting. And that is what was done immediately. That thread probably would have been locked anyhow a little later on.

Earlier in this thread Ken gave a different reason for the locking, in that statement he was "protecting" my anonymity in the situation, and I thank him for that. I am posting this now, because it is sometimes "Better late than never", and I see if I had posted this before Ken's first reply here, this thread may have been a little more docile and possibly feelings would not have been hurt.

Barry

[1FastCSX289]

I would like to add that I understand why the thread was locked and I think it was the right thing to do, however, I could have gone both ways on it. I would also like to point out that contrary to some other peoples opinion that I believe the thread did do some good for the community. I knew what would happen if I posted. I knew the ****storm would ensue, but I believed there was a greater good at stake. Obviously, things got a little out of hand and I really hate that it happened like that.

In regards to the SDAC attendance thing.......I cant see that it really harmed SDAC attendance at all. People understand that people have disagreements. I dont think that its a shock to anyone that all of the members of ANY given group dont get along all the time. Is it unfortunate? Of course, but its life.

I am trying not to harbor any hard feelings towards anyone involved in the thread. I have PM'd Wallace and I have also PM'd Bansheenut. On a personal level, I think we are OK. Wallace and I still have a disagreement over the way this was handled and we are agreeing to disagree.

I will say though, that if attendance takes a plunge, I will be the first to volunteer for an attendence booster. I will be more than happy to get into one of those rented Sumo wrestling outfits and line up across from Wallace. I think people from SDAC chapters from all over would be booking their flights to see that go down!:lol: :lol: :banaride:

[slasky]

I think it would be more interesting to see you go up against Andre; no offense Wallace. :)