Thread closed by request?

[Desdichado]

JD:

I was discussed a bit in this thread:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=129751

So it's not just me that's seen this from time to time. I'll be the first to admit it's pretty rare, but it has happened a few times since I've been around.

 

[Desdichado]

As a result of that discussion the mods have decided to make it clear when a thread is being closed whether or not new threads on the subject in the near future are welcome. We will always try to make it clear if a thread is closed because it got too hot under the collar/political/religious/whatever, or if it is closed at an originators request and new threads are most welcome.

People requesting a thread be closed is pretty rare in the grand scheme of things, and in my experience it normally isn't just that they've got the answer they want but things have got out of hand (e.g. if someone has a question about his DMs decision and the thread turns into several pages character assassination of his DM who he likes and doesn't want to see impugned).

But that's kinda dodging the question. I know that it's rare, and most of the time there's and undercurrent of "this is heading nowhere good, and fast" but that doesn't mean that occasionally there aren't perfectly viable threads that are shut down just because the thread owner asked. I do recall at least one instance where the thread starter said outright he had had his question answered, and apparently the discussion everyone else was having was beside the point.

 

[Jdvn1]

I like to keep threads open so that another idea could pop in later... but if it's closed and there was a good discussion going on, why not start a thread devoted to that dicussion? You could then ask the moderator to link the related thread in the closed thread.

 

[Darkness]

I do recall at least one instance where the thread starter said outright he had had his question answered,

I recall a few of those over the years, but none where that was the sole reason. Though I obviously haven't seen all threads.

Also, users don't always explain the complete reason in the thread itself.

 

[Desdichado]

Well, I don't want to be a beyotch about it -- it's not something that I'm really that concerned about. It is, however, a policy that I don't understand the reason for. And after the discussion here, and in the thread DaveMage linked to, I'm not sure I understand the reason for it any better. If anything, I think it makes even less sense to me now than it did when I started the thread.

 

[Zenodotus of Ephesus]

Threads can be split, if I am not mistaken, thus allowing the conversation to move off to a thread truly of its own and also facilitating the originator of the first thread to have his thread closed.

 

[Darth K'Trava]

I like to keep threads open so that another idea could pop in later... but if it's closed and there was a good discussion going on, why not start a thread devoted to that dicussion? You could then ask the moderator to link the related thread in the closed thread.

'Cause it's easier to use the thread that's already there? That'd be my thinking, anyway...