Answer: A bulldozer.

[Lohn Jocke]

Hrm, I can really see it now. Riosan is obviously a bulldozer. And Silver his steamroller lackey. It all makes sense.

Heh. I can always get a good laugh out of your posts.
Oh, and that's a good thing, BTW

[Riosan]

One thread over the other - no rules broken and both threads legitimate thoughts - can be tolerable of bias, and it will happen. However the fact that some threads stay open with rules broken, incomplete thoughts (and metaphors) and flat out tomfoolery over other threads that may not be to the moderator's liking but are legitimate threads is outright disgusting. 

If we have 2-3 threads on the front page of the most active board about Canada, there's little reason to make a fourth topic when he could just as easily make a new post in one of the already posted topics.

Let's try not to clutter up the front page, shall we.

[Dill]

One thread over the other - no rules broken and both threads legitimate thoughts - can be tolerable of bias, and it will happen. However the fact that some threads stay open with rules broken, incomplete thoughts (and metaphors) and flat out tomfoolery over other threads that may not be to the moderator's liking but are legitimate threads is outright disgusting. 

If we have 2-3 threads on the front page of the most active board about Canada, there's little reason to make a fourth topic when he could just as easily make a new post in one of the already posted topics.

Let's try not to clutter up the front page, shall we.

" We just had the Canadian elections!"
" Did you know a Canadian man beat down a bear?"

Then another mod may have locked it because of spamming.

You have the power to unlock threads, so to be honest, unlock it and give a reason why you feel that it should be unlocked. Instead of having to ask others what reasons or why they lock the threads they do. Like others have said in this thread, it is in interest of the person who feels the need to lock or unlock the thread.

It's odd that you read the posts of those whom preemptively agreed with you, yet neglected the post I had just recently made, clarifying that I wasn't just using this forum, where I am most obviously of power, as an example.

You also do not notice that I just did what you suggested, in that this thread was once locked, but I won't hold that against you. It would take quite an observant rascal to catch such a detail.

To Silver: once again, you are failing to understand my point. If you want to protect your reputation, I can show you the thread and you can defend your decision to lock it.(Totla deleted this said thread when he thought he was smart enough to usurp the Hall of Fame board (I recall searching for this thread with Vaatix long ago)) I'm not asking you to get on your knees and, for the sake of the well being of this beautiful land, beg for forgiveness. I'm asking the true root of the problem, which isn't "Why did you lock my witty thread?", it is simply (and I shall put this in bold letters so those members who do not like reading big posts will be able to understand):" Why do mods (from the background of Nsider) feel the need to lock threads they don't like, regardless of whether or not it has broken a rule?"

This isn't surprising, quite sadly, that you're too touchy about any criticism to actually read my posts thoroughly.

[…]

" Why do mods (from the background of Nsider) feel the need to lock threads they don't like, regardless of whether or not it has broken a rule?"

Probably because the power gets to them, and because the rules are more lax on these types of forums. So they have to rely more on there judgment or mood even when they lock something.
Also most mods on these Nsider replacement/spin-off forums have either just entered adulthood or still aren't there yet. So most of them will be will be less mature or less professional because of that and let there feelings toward certain subjects or users become more of a deciding factor than it should when they choose to lock/delete something.  Of course that's not to say that some adults wouldn't be like this or that everybody our age is like this.

[Lohn Jocke]

One thread over the other - no rules broken and both threads legitimate thoughts - can be tolerable of bias, and it will happen. However the fact that some threads stay open with rules broken, incomplete thoughts (and metaphors) and flat out tomfoolery over other threads that may not be to the moderator's liking but are legitimate threads is outright disgusting. 

If we have 2-3 threads on the front page of the most active board about Canada, there's little reason to make a fourth topic when he could just as easily make a new post in one of the already posted topics.

Let's try not to clutter up the front page, shall we.

But Something about a Bear beatdown has NOTHING to do with the elections.

Oh, and Dill, could you kindly unlock the bear thread? It still can be discussed.

[Riosan]

Oh, and Dill, could you kindly unlock the bear thread? It still can be discussed.

Here's an idea. If you really feel the need for it to be discussed, instead of requesting an unlock, let's post it in one of the two chat threads.

[Lohn Jocke]

Oh, and Dill, could you kindly unlock the bear thread? It still can be discussed.

Here's an idea. If you really feel the need for it to be discussed, instead of requesting an unlock, let's post it in one of the two chat threads.

Are you kidding me? If I posted it there, it would be engulfed by the unintelligent posts of NSFCD.

[Moriarty]

Oh, and Dill, could you kindly unlock the bear thread? It still can be discussed.

Here's an idea. If you really feel the need for it to be discussed, instead of requesting an unlock, let's post it in one of the two chat threads.

Looking at this:

Monthly Summary   New Topics   New Posts   New Members   Most Online   Page views
October     2008         153            3806               6                  33            103567
September 2008        401           10426             18                  59            226599
August      2008         679           15512             54                  60            291017
July          2008         979           20291             39                  60            399594

The last thing I would be worried about would be new threads. Hell, if someone created 400 threads on the evilness of bears and how to protect yourself from them, I'd be grateful.

And I would still like to see mod(s) actually read Dill's post and answer it. I'd also like to have some words with Juni, but that's another matter entirely...or maybe it isn't. Maybe some mods here aren't that different.

[Riosan]

Are you kidding me? If I posted it there, it would be engulfed by the unintelligent posts of NSFCD.

We all have to make sacrifices, my boy.

And I would still like to see mod(s) actually read Dill's post and answer it.

I really don't see the relevance in actually responding to Dill's posts anymore; all he does is bash me about how I do my job, and point out hypocrisy in anything I do. Why waste my energy responding to him when I can practically figure out his responses word for word?

[Dill]

We all have to make sacrifices, my boy.

That's a terribly poor excuse for " I haven't thought of anything smart to say yet, so instead of responding to Dill's posts, as well as the meat of Trace's posts, I'll just respond to the easy posts with melodramatic phrases from a hat, and maybe cut up and mix around Trace's posts to make it look like I ate my vegetables"

I really don't see the relevance in actually responding to Dill's posts anymore; all he does is bash me about how I do my job, and point out hypocrisy in anything I do. Why waste my energy responding to him when I can practically figure out his responses word for word?

I've been repeating myself because you've yet to respond to me with anything more than excuses. This is the second time I've had a conversation with an NSF member, where I had to explain to them that discussion required two participants. Asking me to debate this situation without you explaining anything along the way is like asking a turkey to cook itself.

[Riosan]

all he does is bash me about how I do my job, and point out hypocrisy in anything I do.

That's a terribly poor excuse for " I haven't thought of anything smart to say yet, so instead of responding to Dill's posts, as well as the meat of Trace's posts, I'll just respond to the easy posts with melodramatic phrases from a hat, and maybe cut up and mix around Trace's posts to make it look like I ate my vegetables"

This is the second time I've had a conversation with an NSF member, where I had to explain to them that discussion required two participants.

Hit that one right on the bullseye.

Thanks for playing, Dill, here's your complimentary prize.

[Dill]

Trace, I would have to point out to you how dauntingly similar this discussion is to the one we had with Juni. I am interested to see what these two would do if put together. Would it be like Batman vs. Superman, except less colourful and with more cheesy dialogue?

[Moriarty]

Trace, I would have to point out to you how dauntingly similar this discussion is to the one we had with Juni. I am interested to see what these two would do if put together. Would it be like Batman vs. Superman, except less colourful and with more cheesy dialogue?

Indeed, this is almost suspiciously similar to Juni. I think we'd have something more along the lines of Elektra vs. Catwoman, but still with cheesy dialogue.