It is a very sad that one gets censored here for holding a different view and saying something someone might no agree with. The response is simple. We are a privat website and we can chose what someone is allowed to post and what not. Sad state of affairs.

Aaron747 wrote:

sixfootscream wrote:

It is a very sad that one gets censored here for holding a different view and saying something someone might no agree with. The response is simple. We are a privat website and we can chose what someone is allowed to post and what not. Sad state of affairs.

That's almost every site on the internet with members. If you don't like someone's rules nothing is stopping you from setting up your own site and community.

Cool. I will enslave people in my business too. Since I my business is private and I can do how I wish.

“Enslave people”? Over the top much?

sixfootscream wrote:

It is a very sad that one gets censored here for holding a different view and saying something someone might no agree with. The response is simple. We are a privat website and we can chose what someone is allowed to post and what not. Sad state of affairs.

There is nothing stopping anyone from sharing their own opinion provided that it is posted within the rules of what we expect all users to follow. This includes not calling other users names, provoking other users, flamebait, disrespecting other users, trying to incite trouble, being disrespectful towards crew members, not properly attributing news sources and providing your own comments, etc.

You can also drop the censorship nonsense. There is one common theme of those who bring up censorship and that is those are the ones who fail to take any responsibility for their own actions and blame someone else.

At the end of the day we expect users to act in a civil and productive manner and stay within the rules. If you can’t do that perhaps it’s time you moved on

qf789 wrote:

sixfootscream wrote:

It is a very sad that one gets censored here for holding a different view and saying something someone might no agree with. The response is simple. We are a privat website and we can chose what someone is allowed to post and what not. Sad state of affairs.

There is nothing stopping anyone from sharing their own opinion provided that it is posted within the rules of what we expect all users to follow. This includes not calling other users names, provoking other users, flamebait, disrespecting other users, trying to incite trouble, being disrespectful towards crew members, not properly attributing news sources and providing your own comments, etc.

You can also drop the censorship nonsense. There is one common theme of those who bring up censorship and that is those are the ones who fail to take any responsibility for their own actions and blame someone else.

At the end of the day we expect users to act in a civil and productive manner and stay within the rules. If you can’t do that perhaps it’s time you moved on

You can literally classify anything as flamebait. Flamebait is in the eye of the beholder.

TVNWZ wrote:

“Enslave people”? Over the top much?

Censoring people? Over the top much?

No where in history has censorship ever contributed to a better society.

Aaron747 wrote:

sixfootscream wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

That's almost every site on the internet with members. If you don't like someone's rules nothing is stopping you from setting up your own site and community.

Cool. I will enslave people in my business too. Since I my business is private and I can do how I wish.

'Enslaved' has virtually no meaning in the context of the discussion. Might want to try a dictionary.

No. No. It is a private business so I may enslave people. If they don't like it, they can leave right?

What’s happened to signatures?

jbpdx wrote:

What’s happened to signatures?

Due to numerous issues, they have been disabled.

I just wish we had feedback on why a post was deleted. It is annoying to go to a thread and see your post is gone with no explanation. It really makes contributing feel like a complete waste of time.

jetmatt777 wrote:

I just wish we had feedback on why a post was deleted. It is annoying to go to a thread and see your post is gone with no explanation. It really makes contributing feel like a complete waste of time.

You know the answer to that.

jetmatt777 wrote:

I just wish we had feedback on why a post was deleted. It is annoying to go to a thread and see your post is gone with no explanation. It really makes contributing feel like a complete waste of time.

We wish you did too. Unfortunately there isn't much we can realistically do about that. I wish we had developers who would be willing to help us with a solution to this issue, but we don't.

I just wanted to add my 2 Cents to this, after sending a PM to the moderator involved.

For the last couple of days, I have been having a conversation about possible changes to EK's order in the civil aviation forum. Well with such a broad subject there were various tangents, and we ended up discussing the 77X.s suitability in replacing the A380 - Or perhaps as the 77X was intended replacing the 77X.

At no point was anyone involved within the conversation rude, disrespectful or posting flame bait. It was a perfectly civil conversation.

But, it has now been locked as it was too far off topic....

Over moderation?

There's an active thread discussing AA's mass route cancellations, one of them being TOL-CLT. Can I get an explanation as to why my postings were deleted? A poster falsely claimed that the route's local traffic exceeded expectations, and that it was COVID / AA's decision to put a 50-seater and match DTW's low fares that doomed the route. This is merely a.net lore -- I posted a thoughtful response that pointed out that local traffic never made it out of the single digits, and AA was forced to compete with an abundance of low fares (in markets CLT competes with) at DTW, as it was within a reasonable drive at DTW.

The concept of moderation should not include deleting factual view points we don't agree with.

WidebodyPTV wrote:

There's an active thread discussing AA's mass route cancellations, one of them being TOL-CLT. Can I get an explanation as to why my postings were deleted? A poster falsely claimed that the route's local traffic exceeded expectations, and that it was COVID / AA's decision to put a 50-seater and match DTW's low fares that doomed the route. This is merely a.net lore -- I posted a thoughtful response that pointed out that local traffic never made it out of the single digits, and AA was forced to compete with an abundance of low fares (in markets CLT competes with) at DTW, as it was within a reasonable drive at DTW.

The concept of moderation should not include deleting factual view points we don't agree with.

The post that you quoted was deleted. And as a result, your post was as well.

tys777 wrote:

The post that you quoted was deleted. And as a result, your post was as well.

Thank you for the response! But the post I quoted (flyinryan99) is still active. It's concerning, because he's making assertions ('local traffic exceeded expectations') without providing any support -- and the hard data shows the PDEW never made it out of the single digits, which indicates his point was manufactured. And yet it's a claim that will be perpetually repeated...

Daysleeper wrote:

I just wanted to add my 2 Cents to this, after sending a PM to the moderator involved.

For the last couple of days, I have been having a conversation about possible changes to EK's order in the civil aviation forum. Well with such a broad subject there were various tangents, and we ended up discussing the 77X.s suitability in replacing the A380 - Or perhaps as the 77X was intended replacing the 77X.

At no point was anyone involved within the conversation rude, disrespectful or posting flame bait. It was a perfectly civil conversation.

But, it has now been locked as it was too far off topic....

Over moderation?

We're not actually supposed to converse with users via PM with regards to our moderating duties. It actually mentions this specifically in the forum rules. Conversing via email at moderators@airliners.net keeps our end of the conversation accountable because we all see it — that's good for you and for us. I would advise you to send us an email and ask why the moderator felt the topic drifted and needed to be locked. Keep in mind that when posts are deleted, you likely never see them. Sometimes threads take more effort than it appears for us to keep them alive and on topic. At some point, we simply have to shut it down. I'm not saying that's what happened here, but that's a common theme in locked threads.

Just send us an email and you should receive a reply shortly.

WidebodyPTV wrote:

tys777 wrote:

The post that you quoted was deleted. And as a result, your post was as well.

Thank you for the response! But the post I quoted (flyinryan99) is still active. It's concerning, because he's making assertions ('local traffic exceeded expectations') without providing any support -- and the hard data shows the PDEW never made it out of the single digits, which indicates his point was manufactured. And yet it's a claim that will be perpetually repeated...

You are correct. Let me send an email to the moderator involved and find out what happened. It's possible that the original post may have needed to be removed, it's possible that your post was removed by accident, or it's possible that the reason listed for deletion was mislabeled. Just be patient and I'll make sure we get you an answer.

atcsundevil wrote:

WidebodyPTV wrote:

tys777 wrote:

The post that you quoted was deleted. And as a result, your post was as well.

Thank you for the response! But the post I quoted (flyinryan99) is still active. It's concerning, because he's making assertions ('local traffic exceeded expectations') without providing any support -- and the hard data shows the PDEW never made it out of the single digits, which indicates his point was manufactured. And yet it's a claim that will be perpetually repeated...

You are correct. Let me send an email to the moderator involved and find out what happened. It's possible that the original post may have needed to be removed, it's possible that your post was removed by accident, or it's possible that the reason listed for deletion was mislabeled. Just be patient and I'll make sure we get you an answer.

I take that back — it wasn't mislabeled. You did have a post removed on the first page for a reference post, but your most recent post was removed with proper cause. When posting, we don't allow users to discuss moderation. That's only permitted in this forum. Saying something was "mysteriously deleted" opens your post up to deletion because it's not related to the topic. If you believe one of your posts was deleted, you should contact us to find out why. Your first post was removed because the quoted post was deleted, so, mystery solved. The second post was deleted for discussing moderation. The remainder of your reply appeared to be fine, so as long as you stick to discussing the topic, there shouldn't be an issue.

WidebodyPTV wrote:

tys777 wrote:

The post that you quoted was deleted. And as a result, your post was as well.

Thank you for the response! But the post I quoted (flyinryan99) is still active. It's concerning, because he's making assertions ('local traffic exceeded expectations') without providing any support -- and the hard data shows the PDEW never made it out of the single digits, which indicates his point was manufactured. And yet it's a claim that will be perpetually repeated...

My apologies. I didn't realize that a 2nd post of yours was deleted later in the thread. I deleted the first one and thought that was the post in question.

atcsundevil wrote:

Daysleeper wrote:

I just wanted to add my 2 Cents to this, after sending a PM to the moderator involved.

For the last couple of days, I have been having a conversation about possible changes to EK's order in the civil aviation forum. Well with such a broad subject there were various tangents, and we ended up discussing the 77X.s suitability in replacing the A380 - Or perhaps as the 77X was intended replacing the 77X.

At no point was anyone involved within the conversation rude, disrespectful or posting flame bait. It was a perfectly civil conversation.

But, it has now been locked as it was too far off topic....

Over moderation?

We're not actually supposed to converse with users via PM with regards to our moderating duties. It actually mentions this specifically in the forum rules. Conversing via email at moderators@airliners.net keeps our end of the conversation accountable because we all see it — that's good for you and for us. I would advise you to send us an email and ask why the moderator felt the topic drifted and needed to be locked. Keep in mind that when posts are deleted, you likely never see them. Sometimes threads take more effort than it appears for us to keep them alive and on topic. At some point, we simply have to shut it down. I'm not saying that's what happened here, but that's a common theme in locked threads.

Just send us an email and you should receive a reply shortly.

My apologies: My first response was to just PM the mod and ask why, but in hindsight you are correct in that it would be better to do it via e-mail with a log of all conversations.

I have used this site for almost 20 years now, this is the first time I have ever, well I wouldn’t say complained, but perhaps highlighted the fact that moderation has gone too far.

I was under the impression this was a discussion forum, if we are bound to only discuss topics permitted within well-defined boundary’s then, cool. I can live with that, well I wouldn’t I would go somewhere else, but if that’s your thing, fine. The conversation in the thread was perfectly respectable and although perhaps deviating from the original topic well within the scope of aviation. At no time were there insults, flame bait, or the usual crap you see on the forums.

Yet a moderator chose to end the discussion. Why? We were all being perfectly civil and discussing aviation. The result is I have started a new thread, appropriately titled, and I have no doubt it will be flamed and eventually locked also. Are we just to start a new topic anytime a tangent within a conversation occurs? I mean I can, and I will. But I suspect you will end up banning me.

PS I am more than happy to email you, but I was not trying to complain. Just highlight a problem.

Some moderators are more pedantic than others.

Daysleeper wrote:

Yet a moderator chose to end the discussion. Why? We were all being perfectly civil and discussing aviation. The result is I have started a new thread, appropriately titled, and I have no doubt it will be flamed and eventually locked also. Are we just to start a new topic anytime a tangent within a conversation occurs? I mean I can, and I will. But I suspect you will end up banning me.

I think I remenber not so long ago seeing myself a thread going off topic but with a potential to deserve its own topic.
I used the report function to ask to split and create a new topic with the "off topic" part. Mods did it and that was it. Everybody doing its part and job done

OK, maybe I don't remenber that well. But that should work this way !

Why was this thread about Uganda Airlines deleted after 1 week+ only? Was Lightsaber sleeping or is the only moderator?

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1467093

This is not my video, nor my interest to advertise about airlines/friends channel (I don't even know that guy who posted that video tbh, nor it was watched till the end, after 2min I was done as it was boring, exclusively depending my point of view).

If the mods were fair, this thread should have been non-existent after 3 days only and not only now!!! Shall we discuss to only US aviation and other regional/airlines related now?

The truth is there is zero consistent in the moderation. I don’t care what the rules are, so much as they are applied uniformly as possible.

I had a post deleted that had a photo I took in it. It was deleted for not linking the original source… I am the original source.

But, there have been tons of posts made by other users doing the same thing and they turn a blind eye to it. If those are the rules - that is fine. But when the moderators don’t apply rules equally you get frustration.

Another example. I had a post deleted that quoted a deleted post. The moderator replied to the deleted post (it was an off topic joke, but relevant and light hearted) and his post was allowed to remain while every other post referencing the deleted post remained.

They expect us to adhere to a mind-numbingly long list of rules that would make a lawyer’s head spin - yet offer no consistency, explanation, or even self moderation of said rules.

It really feels like getting pulled over for talking on the phone while driving, and being passed by a police officer texting while driving 2 minutes later. The value in contributing here is rapidly waning.

eastafspot wrote:

Why was this thread about Uganda Airlines deleted after 1 week+ only? Was Lightsaber sleeping or is the only moderator?

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1467093

This is not my video, nor my interest to advertise about airlines/friends channel (I don't even know that guy who posted that video tbh, nor it was watched till the end, after 2min I was done as it was boring, exclusively depending my point of view).

If the mods were fair, this thread should have been non-existent after 3 days only and not only now!!! Shall we discuss to only US aviation and other regional/airlines related now?

We don't always catch everything right away. Sometimes people need to bring things to our attention. Last week was a holiday week for some of us, which means a lot of us had some additional things going on in our personal lives or with our jobs or whatever the case may be. Correcting issues regardless of how long its been should be the definition of being fair, but to each his own. Ultimately the issue was corrected.

jetmatt777 wrote:

The truth is there is zero consistent in the moderation. I don’t care what the rules are, so much as they are applied uniformly as possible.

I had a post deleted that had a photo I took in it. It was deleted for not linking the original source… I am the original source.

But, there have been tons of posts made by other users doing the same thing and they turn a blind eye to it. If those are the rules - that is fine. But when the moderators don’t apply rules equally you get frustration.

Another example. I had a post deleted that quoted a deleted post. The moderator replied to the deleted post (it was an off topic joke, but relevant and light hearted) and his post was allowed to remain while every other post referencing the deleted post remained.

They expect us to adhere to a mind-numbingly long list of rules that would make a lawyer’s head spin - yet offer no consistency, explanation, or even self moderation of said rules.

It really feels like getting pulled over for talking on the phone while driving, and being passed by a police officer texting while driving 2 minutes later. The value in contributing here is rapidly waning.

I'm not saying we don't have room to improve, but expecting us to be anything close to perfect is completely unfair argument to make. If a police officer is watching cars speed past, yet chooses to stop you for speeding, does that mean it's unfair even though you were in the wrong? No. It just means you got caught and the others didn't. I have *maybe* an hour a day to read posts here — do you honestly expect me and the handful of other mods to catch everything when it's not reported to us?

We aren't paid to do this. We volunteer our time to keep this place running year in and year out. Your picture was deleted because you didn't say it's yours, and it was explained to you how it could be remedied. If you want to complain after it was explained to you how the issue need to be rectified, then that's your prerogative, but it's not helping your case that we're bad at our jobs when we explained the issue to you in black and white.

We take copyright issues seriously because that is quite literally the purpose of this site. If we don't try or best to enforce potential copyright issues, then how can we expect other sites to do the same for our images? How can we instill confidence in our photographers that we're going to protect their work if we won't protect the work of others? That's why we have very specific rules on this, and that's why we act on it whenever it is brought to our attention. That's not over-moderation, that's protecting the mission of this site. If you see posts that go against that, then it's your duty as a member of this community to alert us so that we can act appropriately. The reason it's your duty is because we aren't cops, we're users who can do extra things. We aren't immune from criticism or consequence, and we've never pretended like we could do this ourselves. If you notice issues and you choose to ignore it, then you can hardly blame us when there's no action taken.

Asking to the mods team, would you be able to pull out some stats of the moderation workload and support you receive from the users?


Maybe it could help figure out better if the forum is over-moderated or not

Grizzly410 wrote:

Asking to the mods team, would you be able to pull out some stats of the moderation workload and support you receive from the users?


Maybe it could help figure out better if the forum is over-moderated or not

I'm not exactly sure what you mean.. Are you asking how many posts are deleted and how many reports we receive? I can tell you that in the past 24 hours, we've done the following:

Posts deleted: 41
Reports received: 12
Topics deleted: 0
Topics moved: 4
Topics merged: 1
Topics locked: 4 (includes monthly topic refresh)
Warnings issued: 1
Bans issued: 1
New user post approvals: 3
New user post disapprovals: 4

Is this what you're looking for? I would say that this is relatively typical, but some days can be significantly more if there are particularly heated topics. That only happens a couple of times a month though.

Yes this kind of data.
Is it possible to take one month to average better the number ? And contrast with the volume of new posts and thread over the same period ?

Got me curious about the 4 new user post disapproval. What is this, an application from bot ?

Grizzly410 wrote:

Yes this kind of data.
Is it possible to take one month to average better the number ? And contrast with the volume of new posts and thread over the same period ?

Got me curious about the 4 new user post disapproval. What is this, an application from bot ?

No, I can't give you that data. I literally had to count each action in the log and tally it up manually. It would take a hell of a long time to do that for more than one day. Maybe another moderator knows how to access an actual list, but I'm not aware of the existence of such a feature. No one has ever asked.

New user post disapprovals sometimes come from bots or spammers, which is why we now require five posts to clear our approval process before they're cleared to post. Many disapprovals are from genuine new users though. We simply hold their posts to a higher level of scrutiny in an attempt to set the correct tone for their future as a user. Common reasons for disapprovals is a low quality post, using suspicious links or images, and attacking other users.

atcsundevil wrote:

Grizzly410 wrote:

New user post disapprovals sometimes come from bots or spammers, which is why we now require five posts to clear our approval process before they're cleared to post. Many disapprovals are from genuine new users though. We simply hold their posts to a higher level of scrutiny in an attempt to set the correct tone for their future as a user. Common reasons for disapprovals is a low quality post, using suspicious links or images, and attacking other users.

I have a related question. I almost always utilize a VPN either on my work devices or Nord VPN on my personal devices. Does this flag as spam? On Reddit it does to the point I can't access it through my work VPN or Nord VPN.

Can the moderation team please explain to me why my post was deleted this evening in the thread I started relating to the mass shooting in Michigan. There was no "foul" language, threatening language, spam, calling of names. I was accused of being a "troll" by John3:16. I defended my stance and thoughts about the pro gun aficionados on this site and their lack of compassion for the shooting victims. There was no flame bait language in my post, I simply stated my thoughts on the subject at hand. So I ask, again, why was my post deleted and why wasn't I given a message as to it's removal and reason.

CaptHadley wrote:

Can the moderation team please explain to me why my post was deleted this evening in the thread I started relating to the mass shooting in Michigan. There was no "foul" language, threatening language, spam, calling of names. I was accused of being a "troll" by John3:16. I defended my stance and thoughts about the pro gun aficionados on this site and their lack of compassion for the shooting victims. There was no flame bait language in my post, I simply stated my thoughts on the subject at hand. So I ask, again, why was my post deleted and why wasn't I given a message as to it's removal and reason.

If you read this thread, many of your questions will be answered on how it works and the correct way to have your deletion question answered.

CaptHadley wrote:

Can the moderation team please explain to me why my post was deleted this evening in the thread I started relating to the mass shooting in Michigan. There was no "foul" language, threatening language, spam, calling of names. I was accused of being a "troll" by John3:16. I defended my stance and thoughts about the pro gun aficionados on this site and their lack of compassion for the shooting victims. There was no flame bait language in my post, I simply stated my thoughts on the subject at hand. So I ask, again, why was my post deleted and why wasn't I given a message as to it's removal and reason.

Its is clearly stated in the rules why there are no deletion notifications and how to approach a deleted post. If you want the answer to why your post was deleted email us at moderators@airliners.net as it wont be discussed here

qf789 wrote:

CaptHadley wrote:

Can the moderation team please explain to me why my post was deleted this evening in the thread I started relating to the mass shooting in Michigan. There was no "foul" language, threatening language, spam, calling of names. I was accused of being a "troll" by John3:16. I defended my stance and thoughts about the pro gun aficionados on this site and their lack of compassion for the shooting victims. There was no flame bait language in my post, I simply stated my thoughts on the subject at hand. So I ask, again, why was my post deleted and why wasn't I given a message as to it's removal and reason.

Its is clearly stated in the rules why there are no deletion notifications and how to approach a deleted post. If you want the answer to why your post was deleted email us at moderators@airliners.net as it wont be discussed here

I did that concerning a false accusation by a mod but still haven't heard back.

ItnStln wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

Grizzly410 wrote:

New user post disapprovals sometimes come from bots or spammers, which is why we now require five posts to clear our approval process before they're cleared to post. Many disapprovals are from genuine new users though. We simply hold their posts to a higher level of scrutiny in an attempt to set the correct tone for their future as a user. Common reasons for disapprovals is a low quality post, using suspicious links or images, and attacking other users.

I have a related question. I almost always utilize a VPN either on my work devices or Nord VPN on my personal devices. Does this flag as spam? On Reddit it does to the point I can't access it through my work VPN or Nord VPN.

No it does not. I routinely moderate from a VPN connection and posted as an user utilizing a VPN before that. I don't know of any spam flags on the site. Most spam posts are pretty obvious attempts at a script to make a post.

tys777 wrote:

ItnStln wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

I have a related question. I almost always utilize a VPN either on my work devices or Nord VPN on my personal devices. Does this flag as spam? On Reddit it does to the point I can't access it through my work VPN or Nord VPN.

No it does not. I routinely moderate from a VPN connection and posted as an user utilizing a VPN before that. I don't know of any spam flags on the site. Most spam posts are pretty obvious attempts at a script to make a post.

Thanks!

Why do 99% of the posts have an asinine year beside them. There is one moderator that locked all 2021 posts and started all again with 2022 dates. Many of you moderators state your hours in the day are limited but then we have this. Why the dates? This site was not like this before. Is this site no longer a hobbyist site or is it a CPA accounting site with fiscal/physical end of year accounting methods needed? Why lock everything down and restart with a new year? People make posts and these include dates and time stamps. I feel a thread will naturally run its course to its end by way of complete replies/knowledge given or run its course due to boredom/no longer interesting. Why chop threads only due to a calendar change?

notdownnlocked wrote:

Why do 99% of the posts have an asinine year beside them. There is one moderator that locked all 2021 posts and started all again with 2022 dates. Many of you moderators state your hours in the day are limited but then we have this. Why the dates? This site was not like this before. Is this site no longer a hobbyist site or is it a CPA accounting site with fiscal/physical end of year accounting methods needed? Why lock everything down and restart with a new year? People make posts and these include dates and time stamps. I feel a thread will naturally run its course to its end by way of complete replies/knowledge given or run its course due to boredom/no longer interesting. Why chop threads only due to a calendar change?

We've been doing this for years since we moved to the new site, and we've explained this system multiple times over the years. Since you're apparently more interested in taking cheap shots at us, I'm not going to bother wasting my time to explain it..

The rudeness aside, I laughed myself at some of the arbitrariness of this. I can see changing out a thread that has a thousand entries, or even a couple hundred. But some had 30 to less than a hundred entries. Not what you would call big interest and worth the effort IMO. Sometimes we can get a little overly Pedantic.

Yep. And every single airport in the US seems to have its own thread. The first page of the forum is a mess this time of year with all of the new year topics. I understand a few of the mega threads. But why can’t topics just live and die on their own these days? The consolidation to catch all threads is just as confusing as individual topics. Good luck finding a post you wanted to discuss because it is buried in page 723 of some mega thread.

TVNWZ wrote:

The rudeness aside, I laughed myself at some of the arbitrariness of this. I can see changing out a thread that has a thousand entries, or even a couple hundred. But some had 30 to less than a hundred entries. Not what you would call big interest and worth the effort IMO. Sometimes we can get a little overly Pedantic.

You've made your point, and we've explained to you why we've made the compromise we have on this issue. You disagree, and that is understood. It's ironic that you comment on "rudeness" given some of your comments directed as us/me, but I'll just leave it at that. I have nothing else to add.

jetmatt777 wrote:

Yep. And every single airport in the US seems to have its own thread. The first page of the forum is a mess this time of year with all of the new year topics. I understand a few of the mega threads. But why can’t topics just live and die on their own these days? The consolidation to catch all threads is just as confusing as individual topics. Good luck finding a post you wanted to discuss because it is buried in page 723 of some mega thread.

We aren't going to start telling users which things can and cannot have threads. That's not why we're here. If people want to discuss an arbitrary city's airport, then good for them. We do let topics die on their own, but when a group wants to continue their topic into the new year, then again, who are we to tell them no? There was absolutely an over-consolidation of threads in the past, and it's an issue that has largely been corrected from a moderating standpoint. Our intention is for larger threads to be for general discussion, and for noteworthy topics to still have their own threads.

We realize it's a mess with the new year's threads, but it corrects after a few days. It's a lot of work for us, but we have to walk a line between people who are convinced the old site was better and that threads should be locked after any period of inactivity, and the people who think threads should live on into infinity. We went for our best attempt at a happy medium. Clearly it's a contentious subject, hence why you've taken the time to post here, but there is a significant number of users who strongly disagree with your assessment. Because of that, this system was a decision we reached after hearing a lot of feedback from a lot of people for several years now.

atcsundevil wrote:

TVNWZ wrote:

The rudeness aside, I laughed myself at some of the arbitrariness of this. I can see changing out a thread that has a thousand entries, or even a couple hundred. But some had 30 to less than a hundred entries. Not what you would call big interest and worth the effort IMO. Sometimes we can get a little overly Pedantic.

You've made your point, and we've explained to you why we've made the compromise we have on this issue. You disagree, and that is understood. It's ironic that you comment on "rudeness" given some of your comments directed as us/me, but I'll just leave it at that. I have nothing else to add.

[

I’m sorry, what?? The rudeness comment was not directed at you, but the poster above you And you will have to show me one post where I have directed any rude comments your way or any other moderators way. You are letting your emotions get the better of you. Bad look.

TVNWZ wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

TVNWZ wrote:

The rudeness aside, I laughed myself at some of the arbitrariness of this. I can see changing out a thread that has a thousand entries, or even a couple hundred. But some had 30 to less than a hundred entries. Not what you would call big interest and worth the effort IMO. Sometimes we can get a little overly Pedantic.

You've made your point, and we've explained to you why we've made the compromise we have on this issue. You disagree, and that is understood. It's ironic that you comment on "rudeness" given some of your comments directed as us/me, but I'll just leave it at that. I have nothing else to add.

[

I’m sorry, what?? The rudeness comment was not directed at you, but the poster above you And you will have to show me one post where I have directed any rude comments your way or any other moderators way. You are letting your emotions get the better of you. Bad look.

My mistake — I was confusing you with someone else, and I assumed the comment was directed at me. My apologies.

No problem.

atcsundevil wrote:

[
We've been doing this for years since we moved to the new site, and we've explained this system multiple times over the years. Since you're apparently more interested in taking cheap shots at us, I'm not going to bother wasting my time to explain it..

This dear Mods and Admins of A.net is exactly the problem. It's "always been done like this", is used as the kill all argument instead of thinking outside of the box! One should consider older threads with hardly any comments don't require a "new" annual thread.

oschkosch wrote:

This dear Mods and Admins of A.net is exactly the problem. It's "always been done like this", is used as the kill all argument instead of thinking outside of the box! One should consider older threads with hardly any comments don't require a "new" annual thread.

It hasn't "always been done like this". We started shifting to this system in 2018 and it expanded in 2019. As I've already explained — this is a compromise between two groups... One group wants threads locked after any period of inactivity, the other group wants threads open forever. The reason for these differences is because the old site automatically locked threads after three weeks of inactivity, and because it didn't have pages within threads, we locked them and created a new "part" thread after roughly 250 posts.

You weren't around for the old site, but a lot of users here were, and many of them are very nostalgic for the old site. We can't simply ignore the voices of users who have been here for 15-20 years, many of whom strongly disagree with your suggestion. I'm in favor of longer running threads, but there's too much opposition to that. Plain and simple.

I know you think we're just perpetuating "what we've always done", but that's not the case. We have actually had a lot of thought and discussion on this over the past 5+ years, and we still consider this to be the best solution to find a happy medium on a polarizing issue. It isn't going to change for the foreseeable future.