Valve should remove the moderators' ability to close threads that don't break rules / replace the moderators.

[FOXDUDE69]

If a thread doesn't break any rules and people start being non-constructive in it, moderators' should not have the option to simply close the thread.

Not having this option will force the moderators to address the root cause of the constant non-constructive dialogue that goes on around here instead of taking the easy way out.

Without addressing the issue, and the without consequences for all sides involved. you are just guaranteeing this behavior will continue. And that non-constructive behavior will be weaponized by trolls to shut down suggestions they dislike, as it has been seen happening repeatedly.

If moderators still can't solve the rampant and obvious problems in these forums after that, they should be removed and replaced with a new body of moderators.

[Boblin the Goblin]

The best thing to do is just ignore Dalton. It will become a giant circular argument to just pad the amount of replies.

It happens every time.

[Thermal Lance]

Publicado originalmente por KittenGrindr:

The best thing to do is just ignore Dalton. It will become a giant circular argument to just pad the amount of replies.

It happens every time.

Oh, I only commented because you did and others too. Now that they hide threads too I had no excuse not to block him. Not really an issue.

[Pierce Dalton]

Publicado originalmente por Thermal Lance:

Publicado originalmente por Xeratul:

Nah let him say this stuff. He has no idea he is undermining himself

Well, I got to admire this new tactic of patronzing people using "Dear X, Dear Y, Dear Z" to try and bait an emotional response.

If he's legitimately trying to be of good faith, that's not the way to do it.

Dear Thermal Lance,

Those who want an "emotional response" try different things like thin veiled insults, which is not the case here.

I think we should go back to the topic, though, don't you?

How many forums have you seen doing this?

[Pierce Dalton]

Publicado originalmente por KittenGrindr:

The best thing to do is just ignore Dalton. It will become a giant circular argument to just pad the amount of replies.

It happens every time.

Dear KittenGrindr,

I sincerely hope you can follow your own advice. Peace.

[Lily McFluffy Butt]

Publicado originalmente por Thermal Lance:

Publicado originalmente por Xeratul:

Nah let him say this stuff. He has no idea he is undermining himself

Well, I got to admire this new tactic of patronzing people using "Dear X, Dear Y, Dear Z" to try and bait an emotional response.

If he's legitimately trying to be of good faith, that's not the way to do it.

He does it to be condescending. He thinks no one has noticed he only does it to people he doesn't like.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Publicado originalmente por Lilith McWitchy Butt:

Publicado originalmente por Thermal Lance:

Well, I got to admire this new tactic of patronzing people using "Dear X, Dear Y, Dear Z" to try and bait an emotional response.

If he's legitimately trying to be of good faith, that's not the way to do it.

He does it to be condescending. He thinks no one has noticed he only does it to people he doesn't like.

It's really funny especially with his "can we get back on topic" after he usually starts the derailing.

[Al1X1RO]

Bruh went to my profile cuz i got him angry and now hes saying that he didnt even flinch..

lmao

[Pierce Dalton]

Publicado originalmente por Lilith McWitchy Butt:

Publicado originalmente por Thermal Lance:

Well, I got to admire this new tactic of patronzing people using "Dear X, Dear Y, Dear Z" to try and bait an emotional response.

If he's legitimately trying to be of good faith, that's not the way to do it.

He does it to be condescending. He thinks no one has noticed he only does it to people he doesn't like.

Dear Lilith McWitchy Butt,

Are you trying to get an emotional response? Sorry, but this isn't going to work. What I truly think is a lot of people here forgot about the topic to talk about me... well, I'm flattered but we should discuss why locking threads is better than leaving them open, right?

[Pierce Dalton]

Publicado originalmente por Xeratul:

Bruh went to my profile cuz i got him angry and now hes saying that he didnt even flinch..

lmao

Dear Xeratul,

I'm not angry, like I said I only posted that there because it's off topic. This thread is not about vac or cheating.

[Thermal Lance]

Why do I feel like I got half a dozen reports from the same guy in less than an hour? I hope that's only an impression because I am already waiting for one of those hammers once they reached whatever I posted yesterday in their backlogs.

But, the problem remains. Threads wouldnt be locked if people just reported and moved on. Which is something that kept being repeated and I even saw the volunteers before repeating it a LOT. But nobody listen and throw a fit when it dosen't go their way.

Want less locked thread? That is the true solution.

[Al1X1RO]

Publicado originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

Publicado originalmente por Xeratul:

Bruh went to my profile cuz i got him angry and now hes saying that he didnt even flinch..

lmao

Dear Xeratul,

I'm not angry, like I said I only posted that there because it's off topic. This thread is not about vac or cheating.

Right, i mean why would you be angry? You are a machine after all as you keep mentioning in most of your comments. It wouldnt make sense!

[Start_Running]

Publicado originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

Dear Start Running,

1. Unfortunately, that's a fragile argument and it's easy to demonstrate why: yes, bans do expire and in case threads aren't locked, those who were banned may cause trouble again by reigniting things there. You've been around for long enough to know that people don't need the same thread to reignite things, though. It's irrelevant if a flame war continues in the same or other threads. By the way, keep in mind that not all bans expire, some are removed before expiring.

They don't need to.. but they prefer to and if you see the same thing happen a couple times.

Publicado originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

2. You did not answer the question, therefore you leave me no choice but to make it again:
If locking threads is better than just deleting posts and banning their authors, why other forums tend to do the latter?

If Min CHocolate chip ice cream is delicious, why do some places not sell it?
That's basically the question you're asking and as far as I've sen, that pattern is common to just about every forum. They will try descalating and wrangling. Then Punishing individuals, and then if it keeps up. they will just delete it or lock it down.

Again you create a false dichotomy based on a selection bias. Sure there are otherforums that don't lock. And there are other forums that don't just stop at locking but just delete the thread like in never exiwsted as a standard course of practice.

Publicado originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

3. Why are you still talking about this? Humans have moral choices (should I keep the wrong change?), machines don't.

As said. if thats what you wish to believe... don't look deeply in neuroscience. 'Nuff said. But machines are just as moral as humans. The metric for morality is just different, but on the flipside vastly more consistent.

[Brian9824]

It's especially funny because the OP knows why his previous thread was closed, he was attacking users, ex moderators, etc and posting a ton of off topic attacks in his own thread. Basically using it to attack moderation in general like every thread he makes

Once the OP of a thread is posting off topic then there is no point in trying to salvage a thread.

[Pierce Dalton]

Publicado originalmente por Start_Running:

Publicado originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

Dear Start Running,

1. Unfortunately, that's a fragile argument and it's easy to demonstrate why: yes, bans do expire and in case threads aren't locked, those who were banned may cause trouble again by reigniting things there. You've been around for long enough to know that people don't need the same thread to reignite things, though. It's irrelevant if a flame war continues in the same or other threads. By the way, keep in mind that not all bans expire, some are removed before expiring.

They don't need to.. but they prefer to and if you see the same thing happen a couple times.

Publicado originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

2. You did not answer the question, therefore you leave me no choice but to make it again:
If locking threads is better than just deleting posts and banning their authors, why other forums tend to do the latter?

If Min CHocolate chip ice cream is delicious, why do some places not sell it?
That's basically the question you're asking and as far as I've sen, that pattern is common to just about every forum. They will try descalating and wrangling. Then Punishing individuals, and then if it keeps up. they will just delete it or lock it down.

Again you create a false dichotomy based on a selection bias. Sure there are otherforums that don't lock. And there are other forums that don't just stop at locking but just delete the thread like in never exiwsted as a standard course of practice.

Publicado originalmente por Pierce Dalton:

3. Why are you still talking about this? Humans have moral choices (should I keep the wrong change?), machines don't.

As said. if thats what you wish to believe... don't look deeply in neuroscience. 'Nuff said. But machines are just as moral as humans. The metric for morality is just different, but on the flipside vastly more consistent.

Dear Start Running,

1. Those who want to keep discussing a locked thread will simply make a similar one, sometimes under the disguise of something different, sometimes pretty obvious. You know that's not unusual.

2. More like why don't all cars have ABS if it's better than standard brakes? Steam could and should use the best alternative.

3. Not relevant to the topic.

As you can see, things are quite simple.

[Leonardo Da Pinchi]

Wonder how long before Pierce starts to ramp it up and start being all like "No you're just simply wrong LOL".

He always seems to ramp up and starts trying to laugh a lot and use doublespeak whenever he's run out of "counters".

For this, I require popcorn.