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.

Please also consider that we are applying this when deciding if we should start a new thread or not on a case by case base. There are threads in 2021 which will not be continued in 2022, but there are also threads, and here I can only speak for myself, where I have received a message asking for starting a new 2022 edition thread, but the old one had barely more than 10 posts. I would not have done that without the request.

Finally please also consider that not all of those new threads have been started by us.

SQ22 wrote:

Finally please also consider that not all of those new threads have been started by us.

To add to this: we only create many of these threads ourselves so that it's a more orderly process. It allows us to create the new thread with a link to the old one, include a link in the old thread to the new one, and lock the old thread. That way, there's continuity and there aren't two active threads.

Again, I realize that this is not the preferred system for some, but it's what we decided on about four years ago, and that's what we plan on continuing.

I was involved in one of the uglier controversies on ANet last year, when I posted statistics in the non aviation forum proving that manufacturing and distributing the food for an average sized dog generates more carbon in a year than a large SUV does.

Although there was a fairly spirited argument because dog lovers struggled to accept this, I felt the moderators did a good job of allowing both sides of the discussion to share their opinions, while deleting posts that were personal attacks.

I empathize with the moderators, because a post that one user finds offensive will be seen as "fair and balanced" by other users. I also feel that anyone who thinks this website is over moderated should be required to serve as a moderator for a few weeks; you can't criticize the moderators until you've tried to do their job!

Why was this thread locked?
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1466921&start=100
What exactly went "off topic"? This is beyond ridiculous...

L410Turbolet wrote:

Why was this thread locked?
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1466921&start=100
What exactly went "off topic"? This is beyond ridiculous...

I too wondered that, but I thought I missed something as work prevents me from being here more than I would like.

L410Turbolet wrote:

Why was this thread locked?
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1466921&start=100
What exactly went "off topic"? This is beyond ridiculous...

There were a large number of posts that were removed (and therefore you cannot see) which were removed for mainly being off topic. This is an aviation forum, and frankly we're not going to expend a huge amount of effort trying to keep a Non Av discussion on topic.

I just had some posts removed (no clue why), but a single post where another member wrote literally a racist message to me remained. It appears that your "going through the thread to remove..." technique is not really working.

Most of the people I picked as friends over the years are gone from here. I'm getting tired of the obvious bias that's been called by many so many times. Be it favoritism in A vs. B, certain privileged members, name it.

If you don't have the resources to moderate effectively, or are fed up and busy, why continue moderating like this? You delete posts, destroy the discussion just "to stay on topic". The developers can create a better solution by making an option where a post is marked as inappropriate and maybe its color can change. If the poster was really an ass, that will serve a better purposes of shaming him/her than if the post just disappears, and so many good replies to it. If the answer to all the complaints is that the developers can't do anything, then we are all wasting time here.

Have a great day.

BEG2IAH wrote:

I just had some posts removed (no clue why), but a single post where another member wrote literally a racist message to me remained. It appears that your "going through the thread to remove..." technique is not really working.

Report it. I often report inappropriate posts, no matter who they are directed at..

BEG2IAH wrote:

The developers can create a better solution by making an option where a post is marked as inappropriate and maybe its color can change.

It is apparent that the developers are not interested in doing anything beyond the basics to keep the lights on. Expecting them to make any sort of improvements or enhancements is futile.

Moose135 wrote:

Report it. I often report inappropriate posts, no matter who they are directed at..

That's another issue I see. Anyone can report anyone's post. I'm not really sure the moderators have enough time to see the context. They just delete the post and potentially make a lot of collateral damage along the way while deleting maybe excellent posts which unfortunately quoted the deleted original post. So are we moderating one another but moderators only press the delete button?

Sometimes things are missed. As someone else mentioned, just report the post. Moderating is also subjective, and what may seem offensive to one person, may not appear so to someone else. The post you're referring to was in non aviation. As was pointed out above, this is an aviation forum, yet the vast majority of the complaints in this thread have been about posts in the non aviation forum. I'm sorry, but we're really tired of the bickering and mud slinging in that forum, and, as mentioned above, we're not going to go out of our way to get threads back on topic, etc. We'll just lock the thread and move on.

BEG2IAH wrote:

That's another issue I see. Anyone can report anyone's post. I'm not really sure the moderators have enough time to see the context. They just delete the post and potentially make a lot of collateral damage along the way while deleting maybe excellent posts which unfortunately quoted the deleted original post. So are we moderating one another but moderators only press the delete button?

Not at all. I wouldn't expect a moderator to delete a post simply because I reported it. I'm just bringing it to their attention, as it may have been missed. Once they view the post and the overall thread, they can make a determination on whether or not to delete a post. Honestly, most of what I report are obvious spam posts, I rarely report an offensive post unless it is so far over the line that there is no question it is offensive.

I just started a new topic that Delta CEO asked the US federal government to have one joint no-fly list for all US commercial airlines. I added a link, two paragraphs from Reuters article, and my topic got deleted.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1470043

Why?

BEG2IAH wrote:

I just started a new topic that Delta CEO asked the US federal government to have one joint no-fly list for all US commercial airlines. I added a link, two paragraphs from Reuters article, and my topic got deleted.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1470043

Why?

It wasnt deleted. It was merged into an already existing thread on the topic.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1465059&start=150

tys777 wrote:

It wasnt deleted. It was merged into an already existing thread on the topic.

Thank you.

BEG2IAH wrote:

Moose135 wrote:

Report it. I often report inappropriate posts, no matter who they are directed at..

That's another issue I see. Anyone can report anyone's post. I'm not really sure the moderators have enough time to see the context. They just delete the post and potentially make a lot of collateral damage along the way while deleting maybe excellent posts which unfortunately quoted the deleted original post. So are we moderating one another but moderators only press the delete button?

I guess then you’d have to come to the conclusion that, like the rest of us, the moderators are only human. They will make mistakes, just as the rest of us do; that doesn’t mean they should be crucified for it. They should not be expected to be absolutely perfect.

I couldn’t be a moderator for this site. The total lack of appreciation alongside no compensation (not that many moderators on the internet are compensated) would cause me to go insane. I salute those who do take on the task as it is a probably very thankless job.

Over moderation reached a new level of absurdity today! Apparently we aren’t allowed to discuss the effects of the Frontier - Spirit merger on other airlines in the merger thread.

The competitive dynamics of a merger like this and it’s effects on the industry are bedrock issues in any merger discussion. I don’t see how this was determined to be off topic. A merger of this magnitude will cause reverberations throughout the industry, will change the competitive dynamics of the industry, will benefit some competitors, and cause problems for other competitors.

Now I see there’s ANOTHER thread to discuss this particular issue. This take a HUGE part of the discussion about this merger away and seals it off, making both discussions less robust.

AMALH747430 wrote:

Over moderation reached a new level of absurdity today! Apparently we aren’t allowed to discuss the effects of the Frontier - Spirit merger on other airlines in the merger thread.

The competitive dynamics of a merger like this and it’s effects on the industry are bedrock issues in any merger discussion. I don’t see how this was determined to be off topic. A merger of this magnitude will cause reverberations throughout the industry, will change the competitive dynamics of the industry, will benefit some competitors, and cause problems for other competitors.

Now I see there’s ANOTHER thread to discuss this particular issue. This take a HUGE part of the discussion about this merger away and seals it off, making both discussions less robust.

The discussion on the merger and the effects on other airlines are arguably best left to two separate discussions given the vast amount of discussion that can be had. You may feel differently, but it's our attempt to keep the discussion organized and coherent. One large thread for a wide ranging discussion is something a lot of people have been critical of in recent years, so it's not fair to blame us when we're just trying to respond to that feedback. Certainly saying it's a new level of absurdity is more than a little silly given that it's a basic difference in opinion on how the discussions should take place. We're always happy to discuss ways that things could be done better, and we do take constructive criticism into consideration, but there's no need to be sensationalistic.

atcsundevil wrote:

AMALH747430 wrote:

Over moderation reached a new level of absurdity today! Apparently we aren’t allowed to discuss the effects of the Frontier - Spirit merger on other airlines in the merger thread.

The competitive dynamics of a merger like this and it’s effects on the industry are bedrock issues in any merger discussion. I don’t see how this was determined to be off topic. A merger of this magnitude will cause reverberations throughout the industry, will change the competitive dynamics of the industry, will benefit some competitors, and cause problems for other competitors.

Now I see there’s ANOTHER thread to discuss this particular issue. This take a HUGE part of the discussion about this merger away and seals it off, making both discussions less robust.

The discussion on the merger and the effects on other airlines are arguably best left to two separate discussions given the vast amount of discussion that can be had. You may feel differently, but it's our attempt to keep the discussion organized and coherent. One large thread for a wide ranging discussion is something a lot of people have been critical of in recent years, so it's not fair to blame us when we're just trying to respond to that feedback. Certainly saying it's a new level of absurdity is more than a little silly given that it's a basic difference in opinion on how the discussions should take place. We're always happy to discuss ways that things could be done better, and we do take constructive criticism into consideration, but there's no need to be sensationalistic.

One large thread as in the mega “2022 XX airline fleet (and/or network, news, etc..)” or “2022 XXX airport” threads. Which are inconsistent as well because there are different threads for fleet, network, and news for some airlines but one mega thread for others. Not to mention the mess and truncated discussions that it causes on January 1.

Discussing the effects of a merger on the rest of the US industry is totally germane to a merger discussion, especially here where we’re discussing the first major consolidation in the US ULCC segment. They aren’t separate discussions, they’re part and parcel of each other. It would be akin to discussing a hurricane without discussing the damage it caused, or discussing a car accident and not discussing the traffic backup it caused.

I get it, moderating is a thankless job. You all volunteer and do your best. However, policing a thread like that and forcing a new one to discuss part of the topic is unnecessary, creates more work for the moderators, and stifles discussion. I get that sometimes things go way off topic and need to be shut down, but this seemed needless and heavy handed. A good discussion was growing out of that thread because that particular facet gets down to a core issue with any merger in any industry.

AMALH747430 wrote:

One large thread as in the mega “2022 XX airline fleet (and/or network, news, etc..)” or “2022 XXX airport” threads.

Those threads don't get 400+ posts in the first 24 hours, they're up all year, and most average 6-10 posts per day. They're a little easier to follow.

AMALH747430 wrote:

Which are inconsistent as well because there are different threads for fleet, network, and news for some airlines but one mega thread for others.

This is done based on user request. I combined the United thread into one for two years, and we got so many complaints that we went back to seperate threads. If you don't like the inconsistency, neither do I, but you'll have to take it up with the masses.

AMALH747430 wrote:

Not to mention the mess and truncated discussions that it causes on January 1.

This is done as a compromise based on user request. We don't want to do that either.

AMALH747430 wrote:

Discussing the effects of a merger on the rest of the US industry is totally germane to a merger discussion, especially here where we’re discussing the first major consolidation in the US ULCC segment. They aren’t separate discussions, they’re part and parcel of each other. It would be akin to discussing a hurricane without discussing the damage it caused, or discussing a car accident and not discussing the traffic backup it caused.

They are totally germane, but having them combined in the same discussion is your opinion, which is an opinion not shared by everyone else. It's not unreasonable for some users to want to have a strict merger discussion and another discussion discussing the affects on the rest of the industry. You've made it clear that this is your opinion, but the dozens of users who have reported posts and complained about it seem to disagree with you.

AMALH747430 wrote:

However, policing a thread like that and forcing a new one to discuss part of the topic is unnecessary, creates more work for the moderators, and stifles discussion. I get that sometimes things go way off topic and need to be shut down, but this seemed needless and heavy handed. A good discussion was growing out of that thread because that particular facet gets down to a core issue with any merger in any industry.

We're doing what people are expecting from us. Not everyone is going to agree or be supportive. We have to make decisions based on what we think is best for discussion, which is what we've done here. Most of us have moderated here for 5-10 years or more, so we've been through these types of discussions a few times, and we generally know what seems to be the better plan in most situations. We don't always get it right, but I believe we have in this case. I am aware that you disagree, but unfortunately we cannot satisfy everyone's wishes.

I suspect that a large amount of trash the moderators have to deal with are old timers who have been banned just trolling, as they say, “for the lulz” under multiple accounts. As I stated above, this was a problem even when the site was paid membership only - those with deep pockets would pay the $25 again and again just to troll.

In fact, there used to be a whole forum which centered around trolling this site - Airwhiners - which has thankfully since been taken down. The content of that site, which was perpetuated by a bunch of old timers banned from anet who couldn’t move on - was downright awful - they would celebrate deaths of moderators and administrators of anet, they would dox and post the personal address and other information of users they didn’t like publicly, etc. I am so glad that Airwhiners is gone. Truly sickening content and good riddance.

atcsundevil wrote:

AMALH747430 wrote:

Over moderation reached a new level of absurdity today! Apparently we aren’t allowed to discuss the effects of the Frontier - Spirit merger on other airlines in the merger thread.

The competitive dynamics of a merger like this and it’s effects on the industry are bedrock issues in any merger discussion. I don’t see how this was determined to be off topic. A merger of this magnitude will cause reverberations throughout the industry, will change the competitive dynamics of the industry, will benefit some competitors, and cause problems for other competitors.

Now I see there’s ANOTHER thread to discuss this particular issue. This take a HUGE part of the discussion about this merger away and seals it off, making both discussions less robust.

The discussion on the merger and the effects on other airlines are arguably best left to two separate discussions given the vast amount of discussion that can be had. You may feel differently, but it's our attempt to keep the discussion organized and coherent. One large thread for a wide ranging discussion is something a lot of people have been critical of in recent years, so it's not fair to blame us when we're just trying to respond to that feedback. Certainly saying it's a new level of absurdity is more than a little silly given that it's a basic difference in opinion on how the discussions should take place. We're always happy to discuss ways that things could be done better, and we do take constructive criticism into consideration, but there's no need to be sensationalistic.

I agree with this and encourage more breakout threads for topics like this. It is often very frustrating keeping up with a particular sidebar issue in these all encompassing mega threads. Thank you.

TVNWZ wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

AMALH747430 wrote:

Over moderation reached a new level of absurdity today! Apparently we aren’t allowed to discuss the effects of the Frontier - Spirit merger on other airlines in the merger thread.

The competitive dynamics of a merger like this and it’s effects on the industry are bedrock issues in any merger discussion. I don’t see how this was determined to be off topic. A merger of this magnitude will cause reverberations throughout the industry, will change the competitive dynamics of the industry, will benefit some competitors, and cause problems for other competitors.

Now I see there’s ANOTHER thread to discuss this particular issue. This take a HUGE part of the discussion about this merger away and seals it off, making both discussions less robust.

The discussion on the merger and the effects on other airlines are arguably best left to two separate discussions given the vast amount of discussion that can be had. You may feel differently, but it's our attempt to keep the discussion organized and coherent. One large thread for a wide ranging discussion is something a lot of people have been critical of in recent years, so it's not fair to blame us when we're just trying to respond to that feedback. Certainly saying it's a new level of absurdity is more than a little silly given that it's a basic difference in opinion on how the discussions should take place. We're always happy to discuss ways that things could be done better, and we do take constructive criticism into consideration, but there's no need to be sensationalistic.

I agree with this and encourage more breakout threads for topics like this. It is often very frustrating keeping up with a particular sidebar issue in these all encompassing mega threads. Thank you.

Totally agree. It seems difficult to moderate forums in general, and it isn't easy to please everyone.