ModWest said:
If I understand correctly, the people who voted for this option want all threads locked down once everyone has had their chance to voice in with their opinion. If thats the case how are the Mods supposed to know when the final words on a topic have been spoken?
Since it's open to interpretation can you please define inflammatory?
Once again, please define what out of control means to you.
Sure Modwest I'd be happy to.
By final word I judge it just long enough for both parties to chime in with their "sides" as it were, and hopefully resolve the issue with finality, which may take a little back and forth until both sides are ready to apologise and/or move on. Time to respond is important, therefore if the person whose reputation is in question is away and takes a month to answer, it should be possible.
By inflammatory I would say serious name calling, not just asshat or something cute but open insults, as well as flame wars where 2 people are going at it and not just one asshat. Those are the most entertaining so I would still keep it open, eventually they get tired of it and move on and we've all had a good show. No harm done.
By out of contol I guess I meant completely off topic, with threats of violence, inciting racial or religious hatred, or hatred towards women but those people would get banned and their posts deleted so it could still get back on track... I admire the way that's been handled lately, leaving the review open but deleting flameage.
Those are the 3 main grey areas I believe, which is why I really wanted to know where the line is drawn for the majority. Giving the Mods the feedback they need to make their job easier, is a bonus.
