|
|
|
|
|
|
by throwaway237468
2850 days ago
|
|
|
Ok, it's not literally "only" but most. /r/rust is a great example of healthy community. They only delete obvious troll/personal attack comments. You can go there right now and post a post similar to what you deleted on /r/elm and I bet it won't be deleted or locked. > I understand that you're trolling me, but just for the record - of course we don't do that. I'm not trolling. I'll bet $100 that you've at least deleted 3 threads about native code and locked at least 5. Latest example: https://discourse.elm-lang.org/t/elm-0-19-released-what-has-... Moderator quote: > Finally, a moderation note: I’m going to lock this thread since discussions on this topic have the unfortunate tendency to spiral out of control and we have already debated this past the point of productive return. If you have things you need to upgrade, we’re of course happy to help… let’s just do them in separate threads. :slight_smile: Please don't suggest users of locked Reddit threads that they're welcome on Discourse. Just say the truth - you don't want any discussions about this anymore. There's no harm in being honest. |
|
|
To me, those two mod notes are consistent and sincere. Both are saying "this particular topic has been debated to the point where discussions no longer make progress, they just take up people's time and energy. That said, by all means please feel free to start a new thread about something more specific if you'd like to discuss that."
I see this as analogous to React and JSX. When React came out, many people said "putting HTML in JavaScript is Wrong, and React shouldn't do this."
At first, whether React should use JSX was a reasonable thing to debate. In 2018, this has long since been settled. A 2018 thread arguing that React should abandon JSX is going to take up people's time but it's not going to change the outcome of a decision that was settled years ago.
This is how it is with things like Native and typeclasses in Elm. Maybe you disagree, but I think there comes a point where it's reasonable to say "it is not a good use of everyone's time to re-litigate an issue that has been settled for years. You may still disagree with the final decision, but that ship has long since sailed."
I can understand the argument that "people must be free to waste everyone's time, because anything else is tyranny" and I can also understand the argument that "the Internet is full of places to post whatever you please, but this forum is focused on collaboration, sharing, and learning, not wasting time." It seems reasonable to me for a given forum to embrace either one of those moderation philosophies.
This is why I see the two mod notes as consistent and sincere. They are both saying "these broader design decisions have long since been settled, and we're locking the topic because they are a magnet for contentious discussions that don't go anywhere. That said, you are genuinely welcome to start a fresh thread about a more specific topic to your particular situation."
Again, maybe you disagree with this moderation philosophy, but it's simply not true that mods are inviting people to post only to lock whatever the follow up would be. That would be ridiculous.