Jump to content

Recommended Posts

if requested by the Original Poster then I think that's fair enough


I don't think any topic is off-limits so no expression of freedom is stifled - eg in the Somerfields debate I imagine we are free to bang on about the merits of "justice" as much as we like if we start another thread on that topic. But I can't see anything else being added to that debate so I sure as hell am not going to start it


[ lock request ]


;-)

I don't think the OP has ownership of the thread. sure, it can be frustrating if the thread drifts away from the original topic - but that is just like a regular conversation. If enough people are interested in keeping things going with the topic then it will run.

Different when a thread turns into a slanging match between two posters. That's not nice. still feel it's up to the Forum body to step in.

Sadly locking certain threads goes against my natural sense of the ridiculous:))

A Guy starts a thread like the racial one. A motley crew pile in with diverse opinions and the original poster thinks "Oh! my good gawd! I've created a Monster here!".Gets noivous(as The Americans say) and then mentions that he wished he had never pressed the magic button and started World WAr 3 !B),appeals greatly to my Sense Of Humour I have to say....

citizenED Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Different when a thread turns into a slanging

> match between two posters. That's not nice. still

> feel it's up to the Forum body to step in.


Quite. This isn't a democracy. Nor does everyone have the "right" to freedom of speech. I spend a lot (too much tbh) of time on here and think the Admin(s) mostly do a sterling job in the anonymous face of adversity. Occassionally I might disagree with certain things but not nearly enough to worry me.


It's quite easy. If you don't like the way the Forum is run, find another. I'm happy so I'll stay.

Don't think Asset was making quite such a strong statement as that, d_c? and I'm sure Admin is man enough to face a question or two.


My view is that threads - especially the more contentious ones - and often run for a while with lots of people pitching in and good discussion, and then end up with one or two pages of a few people angrily saying the same thing round and round, again and again, with the discussion dying painfully by inches. At this point I think it helps the admin if the original poster says "I think we're done here" rather than having to make the call without help.


I agree that the OP doesn't own the thread, but he or she probably has the greatest say. I've never seen anyone come back and say Oi! we weren't done, but I think they would be free to if they wished and then perhaps the thread could be unlocked, in the same way that threads get lounged and then de-lounged.


Or else people could start a new thread, to discuss whatever it was that the old thread had turned into.

  • Administrator

Three threads locked does not make'th a craze.


If someone asks me to lock a discussion they have started because they feel they are getting abuse, have started something that is now pointless repetitive and they do not want to have to continually answer the same questions again and again etc then I will usually lock the thread upon request. It doesn't happen often, probably six times in the last year or so, so it is probably not worth starting a revolution about the management curtailing the freedom of speech.


And it is not about "ownership" of a thread, they are not owned by anyone. They may have been started by someone and therefore I give them bias about their request to lock it but I do refuse requests to lock threads sometimes. But you do not know about these.


I am going to move this thread to the "about the forum" section because it is about the forum.

Gawd, I wasn't throwing any stones, just thought a discussion on the why and wherefores might have been an interesting one.

Obviously everyone's feeling a bit defensive and I'll just crawl off into a corner.


Feel free to lock the thread admin, as I'm the OP perhaps I can request it now.

Got to say that I've never seen a thread locked where I couldn't see why. Sometimes I'd rather have watched things play out, but I can always appreciate why that hasn't happened. But then I've never been cut off mid-rant by a thread being locked, I'd imagine it probably feels less easy to be understanding if you are the one who gets cut off.

David Mc Wrote:

I just wanted to say to Louisa that if she doesn't

really like it here then she could always move to

Tunbridge Wells. Or Bromley. Or Blackpool.

....Can I second that! After all she was probably born in London.Generations of her Family were probably,also, born here and survived The Blitz etc,and lets face it most "indigenous" lol..."Londoners" have long since left Inner London(almost everyone I grew up with,for example) so lets rid the area of the likes of her who,maybe,just maybe,remembers Inner London as a much safer,happier place and resent the overall drop in standards in behaviour and lack of Community now blatantly obvious in most of London generally.In fact,personally I think its a diabolical liberty that the remaining few "Londoners" pathetically cling on hoping for a better days that will,alas and alac,never return..Pitiful! Risible even!.What London REALLY needs is to be rid of the likes of her and her pathetically romanticised old-fashioned views of Stability.She probably thinks "social mobility" breaks up "traditional" Communities,where people continuously come and go! How fooloish1 Its people who come in,"naturally" enriching the area for the 2 years they stay that should be London's future!...BE GONE WOMAN!(6)(6)

p.s Cue for Loiusa to inform us that she has been here for 5 minutes since emigrating from Mablethorpe,Winchester or StanstedMountfichet..:))

I can remember when this forum was just East Dulwich locals having a good time, then outsiders came in from the er, outside and tried joining in the fun but just tainted it with their repetitive "days of old" speeches. Perhaps Admin could ban 'incomers' and make it the peaceful and tranquil island it once was, ok it won't be as big and diverse and progressive as it is now but I don't care because I just have happy memories which will come back to life if I had my way. :)) :))

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...