Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mark" data-source="post: 3396055" data-attributes="member: 5">Then it should not be a problem for someone without a role (and possibly perceived stake) in a thread (someone who has posted and, perhaps, taken an opposing view within the thread to another EN Worlder) to be the one to close that thread should it need closing.  It avoids the appearance, even if only imagined, that the thread might have been closed out of spite or malice.You're soaking in it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  That is to say that this thread is a bell that cannot be unrung.  It's why nearly every organized body that governs itself by any rules has some sort of policy in place to avoid conflicts of interet and smarts ones have policies that avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.It's a simple matter.  Unless a thread requires immediate closure, a mod (involved in a thread as a regular EN Worlder) simply posts in the private discussion thread that a thread in question probably needs to be closed, then someone uninvolved does the closing based on the unbiased reason that already surely exists.  No problem.  And, perhaps more importantly, never even a perceived problem.</blockquote>