I believe, based on forum participation, that locking a discussion into a single thread inevitably leads to nonconstructive trolling or offtopic flaming.
I can tell when a given thread has disolved into idiotic trolling and tangential discussions and I usually seek out a similar thread with more reasoned participants but often this is made impossible by thread deletion and topic funneling.
For example, I was extremely upset during the RealID debate because I wanted to discuss sub-issues within the issue: how much can you really discover from a name, were women right to fear the repercussions of RealID more than men, etc. But because all posts on the RealID were funneled into one giant mega topic these discussions were fragmented and effectively silenced by the mechanics of chronological posting.
A lot of forum visitors, like sharks to blood, are drawn to a thread simply by it's popularity -- an obvious byproduct of topic funneling -- which leads to a degraded conversation as uninterested parties "contribute" to the thread while having no real predisposed interest in the actual topic.
Confining a discussion to a single mega thread is *always* a death sentence for that topic. If that is the goal of topic funneling then, well, so far it has been quite successful. If there is in fact another goal in this redirection I apologize because it is not clear to me.
wysłany:
|
|
wysłany:
Respectfully, while it may result in the locking of a given thread, it doesn't necessarily mean that the discussion is over. It's a better alternative than the diffusion that occurs when multiple scattered topics are posted. Past experience has taught us that it becomes even more difficult for us to separate wheat from chaff when multiple threads are pushing not only other topics, but other threads on the same topic off of the front page. Please continue to post constructively when you participate in threads regarding issues that concern you, and hold discourse with others who also choose to post constructively. Down rate and ignore the contributions of those who appear to be trolling or disrupting the discussion, and report inappropriate or trolling posts accordingly. Our moderators will do the rest. |
|
wysłany:
I think it's entirely possible to have a level-headed and constructive discussion between community members where a Blizzard representative isn't present at all. In that vein, our continued presence in a thread isn't a requisite for it to remain constructive. Even in threads where there's no reply at all, we're likely reading and gathering feedback. In this case you're likely referring to, we had already communicated all the information that we have available regarding the situation. Should further developments arise, we'll communicate them then, but your feedback is being taken into account in the meantime. |
|
wysłany:
Agreed, actually. Threads should still be locked at a certain number of posts, but that functionality isn't working at the moment. It's an issue we're aware of, and one we're working to resolve. |
