The Energon Pub

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Robinson wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Robinson wrote:If you want the thread to die, the easiest thing to do is not post in it and let it slowly drop off of the front page.

Or ask a moderator to lock it if it really means that much to you that no one posts in this thread anymore.

I can never understand why anyone would call for the shutting of threads that they dont like.If you dont like it dont read or reply to it.

It's his thread to begin with, he feels he can dictate whether or not it should go away.

I feel mostly it's because he may have not received the response he intended. Whether thats the case or not no big deal.

One thing though Mattimus if you do read this. (There is no sarcasm or ill will intended when I say this)
We dont need a new picture of a real life vehicle photoshopped into a transformer attached to every post that you make. A lot of them have been seen and are impressive but not needed. If there is one that you like resize it and make into a sig, if you dont know how ask around someone can help.

Wether he started the thread or not....it does not make it his thread.The thread is a public fourm and once started belong to all the members here

Tell him that, I'm just trying to find the logic in his post.

Robinson wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Robinson wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Robinson wrote:If you want the thread to die, the easiest thing to do is not post in it and let it slowly drop off of the front page.

Or ask a moderator to lock it if it really means that much to you that no one posts in this thread anymore.

I can never understand why anyone would call for the shutting of threads that they dont like.If you dont like it dont read or reply to it.

It's his thread to begin with, he feels he can dictate whether or not it should go away.

I feel mostly it's because he may have not received the response he intended. Whether thats the case or not no big deal.

One thing though Mattimus if you do read this. (There is no sarcasm or ill will intended when I say this)
We dont need a new picture of a real life vehicle photoshopped into a transformer attached to every post that you make. A lot of them have been seen and are impressive but not needed. If there is one that you like resize it and make into a sig, if you dont know how ask around someone can help.

Wether he started the thread or not....it does not make it his thread.The thread is a public fourm and once started belong to all the members here

Tell him that, I'm just trying to find the logic in his post.

In a way I just did since these post ar public but I get what your saying.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Wether he started the thread or not....it does not make it his thread.The thread is a public fourm and once started belong to all the members here

Yes and no.

While the thread is open for any and all, if the thread creator requests a lock on it then the Mods (normally) comply with the request regardless of whether there's been any issues or not.

However if someone other than the thread creator requests a lock it will generally be ignored unless there's major issues.

So in a way the thread creator DOES "own" the thread but the only power they have is to request a lock, not dictate who can and cannot post in it.

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Wether he started the thread or not....it does not make it his thread.The thread is a public fourm and once started belong to all the members here

Yes and no.

While the thread is open for any and all, if the thread creator requests a lock on it then the Mods (normally) comply with the request regardless of whether there's been any issues or not.

However if someone other than the thread creator requests a lock it will generally be ignored unless there's major issues.

So in a way the thread creator DOES "own" the thread but the only power they have is to request a lock, not dictate who can and cannot post in it.

Well that may be the rule's but it doesnt make it right

If the movie is supposed to be G1 based I guess I missed all the overwhelming CGI animation errors.

Swerve wrote:If the movie is supposed to be G1 based I guess I missed all the overwhelming CGI animation errors.

If you look closly enough you'll find a few.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Wether he started the thread or not....it does not make it his thread.The thread is a public fourm and once started belong to all the members here

Yes and no.

While the thread is open for any and all, if the thread creator requests a lock on it then the Mods (normally) comply with the request regardless of whether there's been any issues or not.

However if someone other than the thread creator requests a lock it will generally be ignored unless there's major issues.

So in a way the thread creator DOES "own" the thread but the only power they have is to request a lock, not dictate who can and cannot post in it.

Well that may be the rule's but it doesnt make it right

Depends on an individuals definition of right and wrong doesn't it?

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Wether he started the thread or not....it does not make it his thread.The thread is a public fourm and once started belong to all the members here

Yes and no.

While the thread is open for any and all, if the thread creator requests a lock on it then the Mods (normally) comply with the request regardless of whether there's been any issues or not.

However if someone other than the thread creator requests a lock it will generally be ignored unless there's major issues.

So in a way the thread creator DOES "own" the thread but the only power they have is to request a lock, not dictate who can and cannot post in it.

Well that may be the rule's but it doesnt make it right

Depends on an individuals definition of right and wrong doesn't it?

Not really.....think about it.If I started a thread about any topic and the responces were negitive but there was some honest discusion over it should I be allowed to circomvent others from debating the issue????????Even if it was I that brought the idea to the forfront it doesnt impower me to dictate the flow of the debate....nor should it give me the right to end the debate just because I dont agree with what others are saying.
And if the rules are that it does impower me to do so it would be wrong.

No on the other hand this thread is not such a debate.....but so far its a fun one

Interesting perspective.

See, I actually do believe that if you create a thread then you do so with the intent the discussion will go in a certain manner.

If it doesn't go the way you feel it should or because the majority disagree with you then yes, you should have the right to shut it down.

Let's see if I can explain it a bit better between coughing fits.

I create a thread either expressing my view on a topic, or asking for people's opinions on something.

I find a lot of people disagreeing with my view. Rather than trying to argue my point I instead opt to end the discussion knowing all too well that I have given my view, and others have had their chance to express theirs.

If I ask for people's opinions and I feel the topic has run it's course and things discussed on page 2 are once again being discussed on page 20, then I can opt to have the topic shut down as I have gotten the feedback I desired.

Now I know that may sound like i'm stopping others from engaging in a discussion, but there's two points to consider.

1 - People were given the chance when the thread was originally open.
2 - If someone feels the topic needs further discussion then they can create their own thread.

Provided of course there were no flames or heated discussions involved I doubt the Mods would have a problem with things.

And as long as I can remember it's always been a bit of an un-written rule on the Seibertron.com forums that if a thread creator requests a thread to be locked then it gets locked. There has however been rare cases where the Mods HAVE disregarded that request because they felt things warranted further discussion.

At the end of the day it still comes down to a Moderator's decision as to whether a thread remains open or closed even if a request for closure is made.

Burn wrote:Interesting perspective.

See, I actually do believe that if you create a thread then you do so with the intent the discussion will go in a certain manner.

I cant see how anybody can start a discussion with any real hope that its going to go their way.If thats the case the should start up a blog some where.Whats the point of starting a discussion if your not willing to discus the topic?????

Burn wrote:If it doesn't go the way you feel it should or because the majority disagree with you then yes, you should have the right to shut it down.

I would say that would be childish.More childish then those who chose to flame a poster for giving his views on a topic.
thats like ending a football game because the first half didnt go your way.

Burn wrote:Let's see if I can explain it a bit better between coughing fits.

]

At least I'm not the only one sick.

Burn wrote:I create a thread either expressing my view on a topic, or asking for people's opinions on something.

I find a lot of people disagreeing with my view. Rather than trying to argue my point I instead opt to end the discussion knowing all too well that I have given my view, and others have had their chance to express theirs.

If there are others still on topic and discussing the merits of your views or of each others....
Who are you do judge that the discussion should end????
Who are you to say that every one in the thread has had the chance to completly express their views.
And who are you to denie the others who have not seen the thread yet or the new members?????

The way I see it if you open a debate to all its public domain.

Burn wrote:If I ask for people's opinions and I feel the topic has run it's course and things discussed on page 2 are once again being discussed on page 20, then I can opt to have the topic shut down as I have gotten the feedback I desired.

Again I ask..........
Who are you to judge that the topic has run it's course????

I can see the desire to shut it down if its only a few people repeating them selfs over and over again......but if thats the case let them waste their time.
If your bored with it or dont like what your reading then dont return to the topic and let the others have their fun repeating them selfs.

Its just like back in the 80's and 90's when they were trying to get Howard Stearn of the air in NYC."If you dont like what your hearing dont tune in and listen."

Burn wrote:Now I know that may sound like i'm stopping others from engaging in a discussion, but there's two points to consider.

1 - People were given the chance when the thread was originally open.
2 - If someone feels the topic needs further discussion then they can create their own thread.

[1] How can you tell if every one got a chance to speek their mind????What if a member couldnt use their pc for a day or two???What about any new members that may have wanted to enter the debate????You would be robbing them of their chance.

[2]They could do that but there may be many points of veiw that were in the original that may go un-spoken in the new tread because some may not want to re-visit a simular topic...so new members mag go un-informed on all points or view on the topic.You would also most likly not enter the new thread....ineffect robbing the new threads posters of your point of view...and your self of any new members that might agree with you on the topic.

Burn wrote:Provided of course there were no flames or heated discussions involved I doubt the Mods would have a problem with things.

Flamers would be a good reason to end a topic.....but it would be useless to do so because they would just bring their actions to any other thread with the same posters.Its more effective to deal with the poster then to just ashut the thread.

And as long as I can remember it's always been a bit of an un-written rule on the Seibertron.com forums that if a thread creator requests a thread to be locked then it gets locked. There has however been rare cases where the Mods HAVE disregarded that request because they felt things warranted further discussion.[/quote]

Again ,written or un-written rule I would say its unfair.

At the end of the day it still comes down to a Moderator's decision as to whether a thread remains open or closed even if a request for closure is made.[/quote]

I would say that the mods and owener should have the ONLY say when a thread should be closed.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Burn wrote:Interesting perspective.

See, I actually do believe that if you create a thread then you do so with the intent the discussion will go in a certain manner.

I cant see how anybody can start a discussion with any real hope that its going to go their way.If thats the case the should start up a blog some where.Whats the point of starting a discussion if your not willing to discus the topic?????

Yeah, I worded that (very) badly. What I meant to say was that if you're going to create a thread then you should do so knowing that the topic may not go the way you like it.

Blame the coughing fit.

Burn wrote:If it doesn't go the way you feel it should or because the majority disagree with you then yes, you should have the right to shut it down.

I would say that would be childish.More childish then those who chose to flame a poster for giving his views on a topic.
thats like ending a football game because the first half didnt go your way.

True, for the most part it may seem childish. A person's not getting their way so they take their toys and go home.

However there may be scenarios that justify it. Like the thread creator's original post being worded badly and no amount of justification and explanation can correct it. Would it not be better then for the person to request the thread be locked so they can start a new one and convey their thoughts the way they really wanted to?

Burn wrote:I create a thread either expressing my view on a topic, or asking for people's opinions on something.

I find a lot of people disagreeing with my view. Rather than trying to argue my point I instead opt to end the discussion knowing all too well that I have given my view, and others have had their chance to express theirs.

If there are others still on topic and discussing the merits of your views or of each others....
Who are you do judge that the discussion should end????
Who are you to say that every one in the thread has had the chance to completly express their views.
And who are you to denie the others who have not seen the thread yet or the new members?????

The way I see it if you open a debate to all its public domain.

Burn wrote:If I ask for people's opinions and I feel the topic has run it's course and things discussed on page 2 are once again being discussed on page 20, then I can opt to have the topic shut down as I have gotten the feedback I desired.

Again I ask..........
Who are you to judge that the topic has run it's course????

I can see the desire to shut it down if its only a few people repeating them selfs over and over again......but if thats the case let them waste their time.
If your bored with it or dont like what your reading then dont return to the topic and let the others have their fun repeating them selfs.

It sounds so easy doesn't it to just tune out? People don't though.

But there are threads that just go round and round and round, the topic is discussed to death. Take a look at that Jazz thread further down that keeps getting resurrected. That thread has gone for at least 2 weeks at a time, NUMEROUS times it has been brought back from the 2nd or 3rd page with someone new chiming in with an opinion that's already been given numerous times.

Leaving it open for a new member achieves what? They come in, resurrect a thread, say the same old thing and nothing new is added.

Over in GD there's a thread about thread bumping and resurrecting dead threads. I've seen threads resurrected from nearly a year ago because some new member has come along (and apparently gone through 20 odd pages to find one thread) and decided to reply to someone's post made nearly a year ago. Result? Rarely any new replies, most of them just go "whoah .... old thread".

Burn wrote:Now I know that may sound like i'm stopping others from engaging in a discussion, but there's two points to consider.

1 - People were given the chance when the thread was originally open.
2 - If someone feels the topic needs further discussion then they can create their own thread.

[1] How can you tell if every one got a chance to speek their mind????What if a member couldnt use their pc for a day or two???What about any new members that may have wanted to enter the debate????You would be robbing them of their chance.

[2]They could do that but there may be many points of veiw that were in the original that may go un-spoken in the new tread because some may not want to re-visit a simular topic...so new members mag go un-informed on all points or view on the topic.You would also most likly not enter the new thread....ineffect robbing the new threads posters of your point of view...and your self of any new members that might agree with you on the topic.

All fair points, but really, is it that big of an issue? Someone can't chime in on one topic, plenty of others for them to join in.

And yes, there's nothing stopping them from starting a new thread about a similar topic, and the best part about that is it often results in different perspectives from the original thread.

Burn wrote:Provided of course there were no flames or heated discussions involved I doubt the Mods would have a problem with things.

Flamers would be a good reason to end a topic.....but it would be useless to do so because they would just bring their actions to any other thread with the same posters.Its more effective to deal with the poster then to just ashut the thread.

And as long as I can remember it's always been a bit of an un-written rule on the Seibertron.com forums that if a thread creator requests a thread to be locked then it gets locked. There has however been rare cases where the Mods HAVE disregarded that request because they felt things warranted further discussion.

Again ,written or un-written rule I would say its unfair.[/quote]

That's fair enough. But like I said, it still comes down to a Moderator's decision. Whether a thread is requested to be locked or it's devolved in to complete and utter anarchy the decision still rests with them.

I've seen a number of threads over the years filled with flames but have been left open by the Mods who felt the people involved just needed to get things off their chests.

Fact remains. It's still the Moderator's decision. Not everyone is going to agree with it (lord knows i've disagreed with them many times ) but you just gotta live with it.

Burn wrote:At the end of the day it still comes down to a Moderator's decision as to whether a thread remains open or closed even if a request for closure is made.

I would say that the mods and owener should have the ONLY say when a thread should be closed.

Like I said, they do. If a request is made they don't have to comply with it if they feel it's not warranted.

Just so you know, I do understand where you're coming from with this and part of me does agree with you. But the other part of me likes knowing there's that little option if something happens to a thread I created.

It still comes down to a Moderators discretion and I think they've been doing a fairly good job lately in keeping the peace.

Burn wrote:Yeah, I worded that (very) badly. What I meant to say was that if you're going to create a thread then you should do so knowing that the topic may not go the way you like it.
Blame the coughing fit.

I understood what you were trying to say [even with the coughing] but I dont think its ample reason for a threads closeing.

Burn wrote:True, for the most part it may seem childish. A person's not getting their way so they take their toys and go home.

However there may be scenarios that justify it. Like the thread creator's original post being worded badly and no amount of justification and explanation can correct it. Would it not be better then for the person to request the thread be locked so they can start a new one and convey their thoughts the way they really wanted to?

Very good point....I hadnt thought of that scenario Maybe a edit option would help if somethig like that happened but asking for a shut down would achive the same results.

Burn wrote:It sounds so easy doesn't it to just tune out? People don't though.

It really is eazy.....if you want it enough.I know that when your interested in whats going on or have been flamed it may be hard to tune it out but if others are debating a topic and you have had your say ,and you really dont care what others are talking about, whats so hard about not reading what others have been saying????

Burn wrote:But there are threads that just go round and round and round, the topic is discussed to death. Take a look at that Jazz thread further down that keeps getting resurrected. That thread has gone for at least 2 weeks at a time, NUMEROUS times it has been brought back from the 2nd or 3rd page with someone new chiming in with an opinion that's already been given numerous times.

Give me a link and I'll check it out.But 2 weeks isnt really a long time in the eye's of many......and we all have a right to give our opinion even if its just a repeat of someone else's.

Burn wrote:Leaving it open for a new member achieves what? They come in, resurrect a thread, say the same old thing and nothing new is added.

Even so the new members should get a chance to speek their minds.Again I would say it there's nothing of interest to you [or who ever] dont click on the topic anymore.

Burn wrote:Over in GD there's a thread about thread bumping and resurrecting dead threads. I've seen threads resurrected from nearly a year ago because some new member has come along (and apparently gone through 20 odd pages to find one thread) and decided to reply to someone's post made nearly a year ago. Result? Rarely any new replies, most of them just go "whoah .... old thread".

Thats an other point I didnt think about but I would think that having a system that closes's a thread after a designated amount of time with no activety would fix this kind of problem.

Burn wrote:All fair points, but really, is it that big of an issue? Someone can't chime in on one topic, plenty of others for them to join in.

I dont think its a big deal but I think that everybody should get a fair chance to chime in to any topic here.

Burn wrote:And yes, there's nothing stopping them from starting a new thread about a similar topic, and the best part about that is it often results in different perspectives from the original thread.

Very true.

Burn wrote:That's fair enough. But like I said, it still comes down to a Moderator's decision. Whether a thread is requested to be locked or it's devolved in to complete and utter anarchy the decision still rests with them.

I think thats where the power should stay.

Burn wrote:I've seen a number of threads over the years filled with flames but have been left open by the Mods who felt the people involved just needed to get things off their chests.

I've seen them too.....and I never understood why they would leave them open when all the posters were doing was calling each other names.But hey what can you do.

Burn wrote:Fact remains. It's still the Moderator's decision. Not everyone is going to agree with it (lord knows i've disagreed with them many times ) but you just gotta live with it.

Like I said, they do. If a request is made they don't have to comply with it if they feel it's not warranted.

Just so you know, I do understand where you're coming from with this and part of me does agree with you. But the other part of me likes knowing there's that little option if something happens to a thread I created.

I know you do and I understand your way of think as well I just dont agree with it.I'm a fair minded person.

Burn wrote:It still comes down to a Moderators discretion and I think they've been doing a fairly good job lately in keeping the peace.

Their ok

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Give me a link and I'll check it out.But 2 weeks isnt really a long time in the eye's of many......and we all have a right to give our opinion even if its just a repeat of someone else's.

You've never seen the thread that never dies?

And actually, depending on forum activity 2 weeks can be a long time.

I'll go to bed, wake up and log on 7 hours or so later and find threads I replied to 8 hours ago are already on the 2nd page! There's been that much discussion in 7 hours across a multitude of threads!

Two weeks of inactivity ... man, that thread is buried well past the third page.

Burn wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Give me a link and I'll check it out.But 2 weeks isnt really a long time in the eye's of many......and we all have a right to give our opinion even if its just a repeat of someone else's.

You've never seen the thread that never dies?

And actually, depending on forum activity 2 weeks can be a long time.

I'll go to bed, wake up and log on 7 hours or so later and find threads I replied to 8 hours ago are already on the 2nd page! There's been that much discussion in 7 hours across a multitude of threads!

Two weeks of inactivity ... man, that thread is buried well past the third page.

All right I get some of what your saying......I got 6 pages in and couldnt take any more But this is where my idea for a time limit on a thread with no activity would come in handy

But then what about the new members who come along and want to have a say but can't because it's been automatically locked?

They could just create a duplicate. That seems to happen a lot.

Burn wrote:But then what about the new members who come along and want to have a say but can't because it's been automatically locked?

Hey.....I cant answer every thing

Mattamus Prime wrote:The people who grew up with G2 and beyond should try to recognize that in order to make this movie series a good one... they would do the smart thing and not **** it up by using a whole lot of concepts beyond the G1 series... or even the animated Movie as far as I am concerned. It would be a disservice to the lore to loosely base these movies on concepts from all the Transformers. It all came from G1!

Whoa I take offense to that. I grew up with g2 and Beast wars, and I think your comments are ignorant in every sense of the word.

Sure g1 was great, (better than all the recent shows with the exception of beast wars) but that doesn't mean the new movie should have been solely based off of g1. This isn't the 80's anymore and WE ARE NOT THE TARGET AUDIENCE. WE ARE NOT THE MAJORITY, THE MAJORITY ARE YOUR AVERAGE MOVIE GOERS AND LITTLE KIDS WITH THEIR PARENTS. HASBRO, LET ALONE ANY MAJOR COMPANY WILL NEVER CATER TO JUST THE FANS BECAUSE THERES NO MONEY IN IT. UNTIL YOU REALIZE THIS YOU WILL FOREVER BE BLINDED FROM THE TRUTH. ( /end mini rant)

Your argument is so poorly put together, and Burn has already shown this in his first 2 posts.

Didn't like the movie? Too bad. They can't all be winners.

If anyone needs to recognize anything, its you. You need to recognize how much of an ass you're being with bias statements that you're trying to pass off your own opinions as fact.

You and your argument both lose.

Good day.

(p.s. this comment may be after you changed opinions or mellowed out, but I don't feel like reading through 6 pages of crap that I read over 100 pages of before the damn movie came out.)