The Locking of the Avril Thread

We’re building fires that will burn until morning
The smell of books and hot stone surround us
Tough is the leather that strapped to my skin
Strong are the bonds that we make
We feel the steam as it rises around us
Up from the soil that is cracking it’s back
Tough is the leather that strapped to my skin
Strong are the bonds that sing
Work till you’re musclebound all night long
Work till you’re musclebound all night long
Gotta work till you’re musclebound all night long
Gotta work till you’re musclebound all night long

(aka, any given day in a mod's life)

I just want to chime in that I agree with this. It makes no sense to lock a thread just because of who starts it rather than because there's any offensive content in it.

stupid threads include ones started because the author didn't use the search function first (tho fair enough if they state they did but found nothing tho another poster may know of a previous thread)

they also include threads that are repetition in premise e.g. most of calum's threads. nodody else really does that, that's why they get so much attention when discussing this issue. they make a few people laugh (but for the fifth/tenth/fiftieth time tho?) but seem to irritate more. if anything most people are indifferent and ignore them and that's fair enough too. there appears to be no 'solution' to this 'problem'. but surely everyone would agree that making the same not-that-funny-in-the-first-place joke over and over again on a much loved and valued message board is bad form? the 'tone' of them seems 'disrespectful' as well as half-baked opinions are spouted without real foundation. not that this is offensive, just kinda annoying really.

i don't mind the copycat threads so much altho i guess that joke wears pretty thin pretty quick too.

More proof that lockism is the new rockism -- authentication is to lockism what authenticity is to rockism!

I don't care who starts a thread! If it's interesting, it has a right to live. It should only be aborted if it contains something really scary. The thread I linked had nothing wrong with it whatsoever. I agree with J0hn -- positive re-inforcement is the only solution. What's wrong with someone trying to show they're a good citizen? Even if it's a ruse, if it's taken at face value it may well settle into a permanent attitude. As for 'tiring', the tiring thing is surely running around trying to lock any and every thread by a particular poster. At the moment all anyone is proving is that Calum is right when he says 'ILX is obsessed with me'. He must be loving it.

Do you think this is perhaps getting into territory too arbitrary to justify 'punitive' moderator action? Like the thread Momus linked - it was totally harmless. If someone else had started it it would not have been locked, I don't think. I would have probably ignored it as much as I ignore every other thread about Britpop stars I've never heard but I don't see why it's worse than many other threads. And the REM vs Charlatans thread - that's a straight musical question (unless there's some joke about the Charlatans I'm missing out on - I've never heard them). These are no more 'ridiculous' than lots of (possibly better-written) threads that go on anyway (dave q's Microstoria vs Nazareth; my Doobie Brothers vs Chemical Brothers; Mark R's Alva Noto vs Aldo Nova).

I find that lately I agree with Momus a lot more than I used to. Perhaps it is because I am getting older and abandoning my once idealistic ways.

You know they say if you aren't anti-Momus when you're young then you've got no soul, and if you haven't become part of Momus by the time you're old then you've got no brain.

shit i'm agreeing with momus here..

if we ban all cman stuff apart from the ones that have interesting potential (few and far between i know), then we're going to have interesting threads, and calum will be pissed off knowing that he's done something constructive, and will probably leave in tears to stuff his face with food to make it even bigger. everybody's happy.

wow we can turn calum into a clockwork orange

But certainly the Vs thread was fine. And Norm is welcome to review for my column.

When, based on months upon months of idiocy, there is little reason to believe it. Very, very little. And when he does try and be 'serious' he does so only to set people up and make them believe he's somehow better. For myself, and only for myself I'll emphasize, I find that boring.

I'm not even Calum's 2nd biggest fan, but stopping all threads he creates just because he created them isn't really fair, and I don't think it's productive.

Recently I replied to a thread started by what seemed to be a random Googler asking a bunch of sex-related questions. None of my replies were serious, some were intended to be funny and others were just kinda mean. At least one other ilx0r objected saying that even a thread started by a random Googler could turn into a reasonable discussion if people just answered the question seriously instead of dogpiling on the person who started it because they write in AOLese (lol!!!1) or have shitty grammar.

While I disagree that humor (even lowbrow and childish humor) shouldn't be an option for replying to any thread, I do agree with the point that just about any thread can morph into a serious (or at least worthwhile) discussion even if it doesn't start as one or doesn't look promising from the outset.

pot meet kettle, calum!!

I'll see if I can find anything interesting to say about "Aguirre" after I've watched it. Word rates as applicable from previous writing work I assume?

1. A lot of bridges with shadowy arches, stalagtites, etc.
2. A history of oppression by the English, resulting in intense resentment of authority figures.

P.S. Like I said, I don't have much of a problem with Ned. I'm sure he's a perfectly decent guy *OVER A BEER*

But I'd like to think that while I'm not a perfect person by any means, and that there's plenty of stupid things I've done and plenty of things I still have to work on improving, that hopefully I've shown enough of whatever my good side is to enough of you -- on-line, in person, whatever -- that you can understand that I find the patronizing idiocy of this abusive, obnoxious little fuckup, his shifting stances, his claims it's ALL a joke, his pathetic attempts to butter up just after he's been spewing, his clinging to high-minded statements to justify his behavior here to be beneath contempt.

Yeah, there's something 'good' there in him. But I'll be damned if it ever actually shows. And I'm not interested in playing his game in order to see what appears. I haven't maintained every friendship I could and that eats at me sometimes. But at least I know I didn't start each friendship with an attitude best summed up as "Hey, can I piss in your mouth some more? Oh you don't like that? FUCK YOU FOR NOT GETTING MY JOKE HA HA HA HA I'm so much better than you!"

P.S. Like I said, I don't have much of a problem with Ned Calum. I'm sure he's a perfectly decent guy *OVER A BEER LANDMINE*