HOME > Chowhound > Site Talk >

Discussion

When the Chow team "locks" a discussion.........

I understand and completely support the Chow teams discretion when it comes to locking a thread or conversation. I have no problem with it at all.

What I have is a suggestion or recommendation.........I say once the Chow Swat Team assembles and swarms a thread to "lock it down" that all participants of that thread get one, just one, final closing comment!

So what do you think of that?

"Ok folks we have decided this conversation has run it's course, things are getting a little unfriendly so we are going to lock this thread now"

after which each participant in that thread get's one closing comment.

Brilliant, I know!

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. Generally when we lock a discussion it's already gone pretty irreparably downhill. We don't usually do it until we've already removed large swathes of posts from it a couple of times and we've locked it precisely because we don't want people to continue posting in it. If we've locked a thread for nasty, unfriendly posts, I can't even imagine the level of vitriol that would result if people knew they were getting their last digs in.

    13 Replies
    1. re: Jacquilynne

      You are probably right, but I understand the sentiment. There were a few times when I was participating in a thread that got locked and I was annoyed I didn't get to make one, last point (and I am sure it would not have offended anyone). Then there are threads that I only notice after they have been locked, and I think "...dang, I wish I would have gotten in on some of that."

      1. re: John E.

        You mean that after 400 posts, you still have said that 'one last thing'?

        1. re: paulj

          400 posts? What thread is it that you are referring?

          1. re: John E.

            The last one that I saw locked
            http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/910183
            "moral" food preferences, as a guest
            416 posts

        2. re: John E.

          No, this plays right into the hands of "likes to argue poster for the sake off argument." There are a handful of prominent posters that do this, happened to me once, "I give up, I quit." "No don't stop!", says likes to argue poster.

          1. re: James Cristinian

            Did you read the first four words of my reply?

          2. re: John E.

            Oh, I definitely understand the desire to get a last thing in. Sometimes I'm locking threads and thinking "Man, that guy is just so wrong and I just want to say..."

            And then I go read this: http://xkcd.com/386/

            1. re: Jacquilynne

              See, my point was the opposite. I would post something in agreement with whomever it was that I agreed.

              1. re: Jacquilynne

                LOL that is a funny cartoon!

                C'mon Jacquilynne didn't I sound "Chow Official" in my mock thread lock in my post? I think I could be a Mod, you need any help?

                (Then I could get the last word on ALL locked threads.......muuuahahahahahahahaha {{insert evil madman laugh}} )

                1. re: jrvedivici

                  "(Then I could get the last word on ALL locked threads.......muuuahahahahahahahaha {{insert evil madman laugh}}"

                  I think you are probably badly over estimating the pleasure inherent in copying and pasting in the boilerplate statement "Ok folks we have decided this conversation has run it's course, things are getting a little unfriendly so we are going to lock this thread now" (g)

                  1. re: jrvedivici

                    There is a Chowhound who uses that graphic as their avatar. I wish I could remember who it is.

                    1. re: John E.

                      {{ pssssst John E...........perhaps you stumbled upon Jacquilynne's civilian handle!?!?! you could be on to something here!! }}

                      1. re: jrvedivici

                        The closest thing I have to a civilian handle is jasandrea2. She shows up when I need to test things and have to be able to login and look at the site like a user rather than an administrator. She's most likely to be spotted on the Testing Thread. She may also have put in an appearance or two on the short-lived, but deeply beloved Banana Board. She's just like me, except she has a goatee.

                        Well, a goatee and a lack of admin rights on the site. But otherwise, we're totally the same.

            2. Live every day as if it were your last one. Make every post as if it was your last one in before the lock...

              1. I can usually tell the threads that are going to get locked with the first 25 posts. You can almost predict it from the issue raised by the OP. By the time the thread is locked, I've usually left the discussion but I do keep reading. Damn rubberneckers.

                11 Replies
                1. re: Bkeats

                  Yes! Sometimes there will be a thread on tipping or some such hot topic that seems like it's starting off peacefully, and then there's the one comment that's phrased in just the right way to set someone else off, and then it's off to the races.

                  But the OP has me laughing to myself about what some of those final posts might be....

                  1. re: Bkeats

                    Just happened on another one. You could see it coming as I predicted. I wanted to post one last comment that would have been

                    tick,..tick...tick...lock

                          1. re: jrvedivici

                            I don't think I've ever been happier to see a thread locked!!!

                            1. re: jrvedivici

                              I glanced at it and am not particularly saddened that I missed it.

                              1. re: jrvedivici

                                I too understand the need for locking some threads, but consider this: If that particular thread had been locked a couple of comments earlier, we would have missed cowboyardee's response. I don't know about anyone else, but I felt it was a very well-reasoned and thought-provoking response, and it made me reconsider my whole stance on the issue.

                                It's easy enough to ignore the contentious posts -- however, an "ignore poster" button would sure come in handy.

                                1. re: Steve Green

                                  I so agree that an "ignore" button would be a major enhancement, and likely lead to less need for enforcement and moderator intervention.

                                  1. re: Steve Green

                                    I don't care for the ignore feature.

                                    I do use the 'recommend' button occassionally. I went back and recommended cowboyardee's post. You cannot add a comment in a locked discussion but you can still use the recommend button.

                              2. re: Bkeats

                                I was sooooo hoping to get in ONE comment. Just ONE.

                            2. Oh, please do not do this! I am thankful when I am part of a thread that gets shut down and I am told to "shut up." Having one more say is the last thing I want (or need)! :)

                              7 Replies
                              1. re: ttoommyy

                                I hate it when someone appeals to my worst instincts...That little horned guy dressed all in red on my shoulder with the pitchfork and the tail with the point on it just laughs and laughs when that happens...

                                1. re: Servorg

                                  In all seriousness, I have made a concerted effort to just close a thread when i feel I am going to respond with a snippy, sarcastic, rude response. So far I've been "clean" for about a month. A personal best!

                                  1. re: ttoommyy

                                    I have truly been trying to do the same myself, however I have to say I have noticed a trend on the boards lately. I call it the Chow contest, it just seems EVERYONE has to prove they are "right". It drives me crazy.

                                    I don't know why if someone has an opinion about a thread that is opposite of yours or mine, why they can't just express their varying opinion directly to the OP. Instead the trend seems to be to respond to my opinion with something like "I've got to completely disagree with your suggestion here..........". Who care's if you disagree......just tell the OP your opinion and move on, it's like everyone want's to challenge each other. It's really getting on my nerves.

                                    You got a problem with that ttoommyy? Hmmmm? lol joke.

                                    1. re: jrvedivici

                                      All kidding aside, you are right on. I found myself challenging everyone and one day just had it with myself. I actually went cold turkey from CH for about 2 weeks an then slowly waded back in. I am enjoying the site much more now.

                                      1. re: ttoommyy

                                        For the record I didn't intend my comment to be directed towards you personally. I was just teasing and didn't mean to call you out in any way. Glad to have you back!

                                        1. re: jrvedivici

                                          Didn't take it that way at all. No worries.

                                      2. re: jrvedivici

                                        I've noticed the same thing which is why I made my particular contribution to MGZ's thread on posting rules

                                        http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/9103...

                                2. Jrvedivici, by the time the thread is locked, everyone has said way more than they needed to already!
                                  DH loves to argue politics on FB with any and all who will read and respond. Nobody shuts him down, and sometimes he needs to be cut off at the pass, right now!
                                  I'm a Donna Reed-Pollyanna-who hates angst, so I try and avoid making snippy comments that will only piss someone off. I'd stay awake at night wondering "Does someone on Chowhound dislike me?". ;-)
                                  I do get a kick out of those who like to argue, and I often read posts aloud to my hubby. He loves it.

                                  1 Reply
                                  1. re: kitchengardengal

                                    I found that it was just so tiring, mentally that is, to argue and keep trying to get the last word in. Thank god for the CH lock out!

                                  2. If an intervention is required it is because everyone wants to have the last word. Sometimes the arguing about a food issue just gets completely out of hand and sometimes it even gets nasty. I'm glad they cut it off at some point. I was involved in one argument of sorts which got locked down. I will try my best not to get involved in any other dispute again, that's not why I joined Chowhound.

                                    2 Replies
                                    1. re: Ruthie789

                                      A few months after I started posting on Chowhound, I found myself in a dispute about locavorism (is that a
                                      word?). I had been posting on a news site where things were a bit more contentious. Anyway, the thread was shut down and I learned to tone thinfs down here. The folks posting here are mostly not looking for a confrontation, unlike a political site in which
                                      I regularly post.

                                      1. re: John E.

                                        I do think locavorism is a word or it should be it makes sense. Sometimes a food point of view is political and sometimes militant, if your point of view differs, it does become like a political debate.

                                    2. On another (non food) board I use, the mods quickly lock a thread when it has turned nasty. Quite right.

                                      They have a different attitude towards a thread that, whilst not nasty, has become boring, repetitive and irritating stating "unless anyone has anything new to contribute, we are going to lock this in 24 hours". Seems to work well.

                                      46 Replies
                                      1. re: Harters

                                        The mods are often doing a favor by not allowing one last bite at a poison apple.

                                        1. re: Veggo

                                          Biting a poison apple isn't too bad, as long as you don't swallow!

                                        2. re: Harters

                                          That's an interesting approach. I'm interested to know what usually happens after they post that. Do people mostly stop posting? Come up with novel new points about a subject? Go for broke for the last 24 hours?

                                          I feel like in a lot of cases, the people who are going in circles with each other on these threads don't actually think they're being as repetitive and irritating as they appear to people who have less vested in the argument. Similarly, the people who jump in to a conversation late as a brand new participant but basically just reiterate something 10 people have already said -- they feel their take on it is fresh or different from what came before, even if it's just a slightly different way of explaining what others have already said.

                                          1. re: Jacquilynne

                                            The protaganists usually take the hint and stop posting. Your second paragraph is exactly how it is on that board. The mod is likely to preface the 24 hour delay with some reference to "You are being boring and repetitive. Find something new to say or the thread gets locked".

                                            There are practical differences between it and Chowhound. Although it is one of the major players in its field, it is owned as a not-for profit company and the six moderators are the site's owners. As such, it is rare that contributors want to seriously piss off the owners, who are also posters to the site. They are not anonymous and there has always been something of a genuine sense of community.

                                            On the other side of the coin, there can be much more aggression and nastiness than I see on Chowhounds - just on a personal level, the threats were once such that I contacted my local police (and I know I am not alone in having had to do that). But I'll also confess that an abusive and very profame post of mine, for which i would not apologise, got me a suspension from the board for some while.

                                            1. re: Harters

                                              Harters, I'm shocked that anything you would write would/could be that harsh. Guess we just see the other side of that coin :)

                                              1. re: c oliver

                                                Someone offended me, by being dismissive of a question I had asked. I reacted. Such is life.

                                                What I found really annoying was that the other person was deemed blameless. You'd always want to see impartiality but you don't always get even-handedness. It's an issue, IMO, also for Chowhound moderators - particularly difficult when they are only looking at an issue from their own cultural perspective and not appreciating that the board is international and what may be fine in one country by way of choice of language, etc, may be anything but fine in another.

                                                1. re: Harters

                                                  "...particularly difficult when they are only looking at an issue from their own cultural perspective..."

                                                  Bloody Yanks! Looking at things through rose (with thorns attached) colored glasses when they damn well ought to be looking at them through rose coloured specs...

                                                  1. re: Servorg

                                                    Indeed so.

                                                    Or in the example I had in mind, a word which is extremely racially offensive in the UK but appears not to be in America.

                                                    1. re: Harters

                                                      If the word is not racially offensive in America, can you give us a little hint?

                                                      1. re: John E.

                                                        It may well be associated with a type of lime...at least that's my guess...

                                                        1. re: John E.

                                                          John

                                                          Let me preface this by saying that the word was posted on the UK board and I am sure that it was not intended to give offence. I was not the only British contributor to express surprise at seeing the word. My issue was not with the poster but that the mods failed to understand the offence that it was inadvertently giving (although it was altered much later, I'm pleased to acknowledge) - even when I pointed them in the direction of a very prominent person who had used the word - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7822883...

                                                          I have much sympathy with the mods. They cannot be expected to know what is and is not acceptable in different cultures - although I do expect them to learn quickly when something is pointed out to them. Quick learning did not occur in this example.

                                                          1. re: Harters

                                                            If the word to which you refer is the one in your link that is an adjective that is slang for a Muslim head covering, use of that word is also offensive in the U.S. If the word is a shortened term for a native of Pakistan, this is the first time I have ever read of the use of the word and I was ignorant to it's status as a pejorative.

                                                            On a side note, I wonder how long a thread about locking threads will continue before it too is locked?

                                                            1. re: John E.

                                                              I was aware of it being an offensive term for a person. And I'm in the US.

                                                              1. re: c oliver

                                                                I wasn't aware of it until I saw the reporting about it. I've never heard anyone use it in the U.S.

                                                              2. re: John E.

                                                                "I was ignorant to it's status as a pejorative"

                                                                Now you know. It is as offensive as what I understand Americans refer to as the "N word".

                                                                1. re: Harters

                                                                  Are we still talking about a derogatory term for someone from Pakistan? With all of the sleight of hand here I am not entirely clear about it. The link you provided spent much more time discussing a different word the prince used.

                                                                  1. re: John E.

                                                                    I'm surprised that you didnt find the BBC article clear. It seems quite clear in the opening sentences, which includes the word.

                                                                    The word in question is "Paki", which you must have missed in the second sentence..

                                                                    It is used as term of racial abuse for anyone from a south asian country. It is as offensive in the UK as "nigger" would be in America. Clear now?

                                                                    1. re: Harters

                                                                      I have never heard the term. I'll remember not to repeat it.

                                                                      1. re: Veggo

                                                                        It is one of those different culture things, Veggo.

                                                                        A friend of mine - a politically leftwing lawyer from Kentucky -inadvertently used another racially abusive word on the other board I referred to earlier. He was horrified when I emailed to explain the way the word is actually used nowadays, rather than it perhaps was in an historical context.

                                                                        1. re: Harters

                                                                          These inter-cultural exchanges are very useful. Thanks, John.

                                                                          1. re: Harters

                                                                            I know we're not supposed to "out" fellow hounds, but as I live in KY, I'm curious that there exists a politically leftwing lawyer here. I'd love to meet him. :)

                                                                            1. re: NonnieMuss

                                                                              One of the most famous progressive (liberal) lawyers in the history of American jurisprudence hailed from Kentucky. Louis Brandeis

                                                                              1. re: Servorg

                                                                                Louis Brandeis is unlikely to be posting here though. :)

                                                                                1. re: NonnieMuss

                                                                                  Or even when he was alive (for that matter)... (g)

                                                                              2. re: NonnieMuss

                                                                                Sorry to disappoint on two counts. First is that he ain't a Chowhound contributor, so I wouldnt be outing a hound as such. And, second, I've no intention of identifying a friend on an internet discussion board.

                                                                          2. re: Harters

                                                                            Harters, I'm really surprised not everyone knows this and I don't know why I do. But I AM really tuned into derogatory terms. Probably from growing up in the South in the 50s and 60s.

                                                                            1. re: Harters

                                                                              Yes, it is clear. I did see the word at the beginning of the article, but another word was also used by the prince that he should not have used.

                                                                              It must be because of the UK's long interactions in India and what is now Pakistan that this might be more of an issue than it is in my part of the world. Until this thread I had never read nor heard anyone use the term. I missed the news when the prince was caught using it.

                                                                              I have however heard many people use the derogatory term for a Muslim that is mentioned in the article under 'Unfortunate timing'. Since that is a term often used in the U.S. by bigots, I was unclear on the topic. I am sorry if my ignorance and questions bothered you.

                                                                              1. re: Harters

                                                                                I've heard the term "raghead" but not "paki". In defense of Prince Harry, there's no telling what his colleagues in arms referred to "him" as and he didn't think twice about it. Things are different in the military.

                                                                                1. re: Harters

                                                                                  Wow I'm truly surprised this is the first I'm ever learning of the term being such an offensive turn. Is it strictly used to demean people of Pakistan decent, or is it also a derogatory term used among other nationalities?

                                                                                  1. re: Harters

                                                                                    Thanks for this clarification, John. I have neither heard of the word nor seen/heard it in use. I'll certainly pay closer attention in future. I must lead a really sheltered life.

                                                                                    1. re: Harters

                                                                                      I have to say that when I lived in the UK, I heard "paki" more frequently, from a wider range of people, and in a wider range of situations than I could ever imagine for "nigger" in the US, and I don't remember witnessing the kind of reactions that you would normally see if someone were to say "nigger" in similar circumstances in the US. Just my own, unreliable recollection of my own, biased perceptions of my own, limited experience. But it all leads me to believe that it may be difficult to evaluate in any objective way the relative offensiveness of these two offensive words in their respective cultures.

                                                                                      1. re: DeppityDawg

                                                                                        My Pakistani coworker here in NYC refers to herself and others as Pakis and without any hint of negativity. I never got the feeling it was derogatory.

                                                                                        1. re: ttoommyy

                                                                                          I know that it's fine at times for one black person to call another "nigger." Not for others however. Ever.

                                                                                          1. re: c oliver

                                                                                            Yes, I know that, but she says it in mixed company and is a very professional person; she is not using it like that. I can equate it to the use of the word "Brits" if anything. Just a shortened word for Pakistani, but not derogatory at all.

                                                                                            1. re: ttoommyy

                                                                                              I'd ask her privately about it. You'll get good feedback probably.

                                                                                        2. re: DeppityDawg

                                                                                          We're probably already going way off topic but DeppityDawg's experience of living in my country comes as no surprise. There is a strong racist/xenophobic undercurrent in large sections of British society and you don't have to scratch the surface too much to find it. .

                                                                                          However, for anyone wishing to explore the derogatory nature of the word, they may wish to Google on the widespread coverage and commentary on the Prince Harry story or, indeed, the even less pleasant phrase "paki bashing".

                                                                                          1. re: Harters

                                                                                            New York has Anthony Weiner; the U.K. has Prince Harry, whose "faux pas" list keeps growing. Between the Nazi costume, nude pics, and this, the birth of George Alexander Louis must be extra-welcome.

                                                                                            I didn't know Paki is a racially-charged term in the U.K., either, but the prince can't claim the same ignorance. I have also heard that "bloody", which Americans think of as a British synonym for terrible or annoying, has a worse connotation in the U.K. I can't recall the term or details, but wasn't there some kerfuffle about a slang term somebody used about Mario Batali's orange shorts, that is not incendiary in America, but offensive in the U.K.?

                                                                                            1. re: greygarious

                                                                                              On "bloody", that's a very mild word in the UK, usually just used for emphasis as in "You've made a bloody mess of plating that salad, Harters" or "Yes, but it tastes bloody lovely". I know it's used as such in much of the Anglophone Commonwealth although I don't know if it's used in Canada.

                                                                                              Would love to know the Batali shorts slang.

                                                                                              1. re: Harters

                                                                                                I also think it's pretty mild, but I do notice that certain newspaper sites will censor it, or print "b****y" or some such.

                                                                                              2. re: greygarious

                                                                                                "...but wasn't there some kerfuffle about a slang term somebody used about Mario Batali's orange shorts..."

                                                                                                I think it's his shoes (clogs of some type or another) are orange. Not his shorts.

                                                                                                1. re: greygarious

                                                                                                  Gordon Ramsay called him "Fanta Pants", and "pants" is one of those treacherous US/UK differences. Maybe that's what greygarious were thinking of? But I wouldn't really call it offensive, just puerile.

                                                                                                  1. re: DeppityDawg

                                                                                                    I think Fanta refers to orange soda. Pretty funny, actually.

                                                                                                    1. re: DeppityDawg

                                                                                                      It was definitely something to do with pants or shorts, not his infamous clogs.

                                                                                        3. re: John E.

                                                                                          You stole my thunder there John, I've been sitting back waiting to see where this baby took us.

                                                                        2. re: Harters

                                                                          Is the other non-food board you are referring to a UK based board or a US based board such as this? I would bet its a UK based board, I have a feeling they would exhibit more self control and civility than us barbaric Americans!