What you are saying sounds very reasonable and I am surprised about what has happened.
Locking this thread - seriously mods??
Sort:
corum wrote:
What you are saying sounds very reasonable and I am surprised about what has happened.
Could you be more precise? I can't tell if you are surprised at what the mod did or if you are surprised at macer posting something serious.
Yeah. I am against this.
Next, the moderators will ensure that the move 1.e4 may no longer be played in any chess.com games. There's simply too much of it about.
kingofshedinjas wrote:
<<< Awkward naming and shaming r
CookedQueen wrote:
kingofshedinjas wrote:
<<< Awkward naming and shaming removed >>>
Was it really that awkward? I thought it was alright.
I was surprised this thread was locked as well. One of the joys of being a regular on here is the enjoyment one can get by being exasperated by the repetitive threads... I'm dreading the wannabee GM threads being locked - it's too much fun taking the moral high ground...
macer75 wrote:
Was it really that awkward? I thought it was alright.
Imho it was ok, I was quoting another person
Who is quoting who?
CookedQueen wrote:
macer75 wrote:
Was it really that awkward? I thought it was alright.
Imho it was ok, I was quoting another person
Yeah, I was referring to kosd's message, which you quoted. I didn't think it was that awkward. Anyway, it's all in good fun.
I guess people understand the repetitive point but then one is thinking about the countless "interesting" threads, without naming names for example the n-worst/worse ... things ...
and the countless variations of that.
kingofshedinjas wrote:
corum wrote:
What you are saying sounds very reasonable and I am surprised about what has happened.
Could you be more precise? I can't tell if you are surprised at what the mod did or if you are surprised at macer posting something serious.
Pretty sure he means Macer's actions
The World is falling apart, clearly
When there's another thread with essentially the exact same name, why not simply put your 2 cents there?
MickinMD wrote:
When there's another thread with essentially the exact same name, why not simply put your 2 cents there?
As I noted in my original post, the name of the threads may be the same, but there is an essential difference between the OP creating a thread with his own top 10 players of all time, and him replying to another thread on the subject.
Moreover, the major issue in this case is that the mod is making the decision for him, even if you may think that he should have made the decision that the mod made. I explained in my original post a number of reasons why I oppose the mod making that decision.
alexm2310 wrote:
Where do they draw the line? I doubt any of today's hot topic threads are original
Exactly. This lock was completely out of the blue for me. In the past I've only encountered two situations where threads were locked for repetiveness, neither of which is comparable to this one:
1. When one person creates two or more threads that are the same (which is usually accidental).
2. There was one time when there was a major bug in live chess (I can't remember what it is), and the forums were flooded with threads on the bug. Eventually the mods told people to report the bug only on existing threads, and that new threads on the bug would be deleted. I suppose that given the situation their response was understandable.
In this particular instance the OP was simply creating his first thread on a commonly discussed topic. His own top 10 list which he included in his first post was actually quite original, as it included Caruana, So and Aronian. I suppose if he had titled it "What do you think of my top 10 players list?" the mods might have been ok with it - yet the content of the thread would not have been greatly different. In any case, this is the first instance I have seen of a mod locking a thread under normal circumstances simply for being unoriginal.
I just went and "booked up" on the locked topic. What very few posts there were, were at least interesting and, contrary to the majority of topics posted on the site, the topic had not devolved into a troll vs troll contest.
If my preference meant anything, I would rather see multiple short threads (I can't help myself, I'm USENET old-school, I call them threads) than threads that go on for dozens of pages with most of the posts vacuous blather.
So anyway, to make a long story short, if Capablanca had today's tools he'd crush everyone. 
Update: The thread below (and another one that I mention later on in this thread) has now been unlocked by Erik.
Just now a mod locked this thread:
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/top-10-chessplayers-in-history
and posted the following message:
"Please contribute to one of the several previous threads on this topic rather than creating a new one, such as
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/top-ten-greatest-chess-players-of-all-time
or
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-players/top-5-players-of-all-time-1
I am locking this particular one."
Now, I am completely dumbfounded. The topic is one of the most popular subjects of discussion in chess, so of course people are going to create a lot of threads about it. Why start locking threads on the subject now, when they are in no way a violation of chess.com's TOS, and people have been creating such threads freely on the forums since the earliest days of chess.com (and rightfully so)?
In my opinion, locking a thread simply because it touches upon a topic that has been discussed before is not within the rightful powers of a moderator. I can understand if it's the same individual posting similar topics, but the thread in question in particular is the first of its nature created by the OP. Does this new development mean that now every time we create a thread on the forums, we have to make sure that no one else has ever created a thread on the same topic? Moreover, the OP's first post includes his own list of top 10 players, so the ensuing discussion is more likely to address his particular list than if he had simply posted on another "top 10 chess players" thread - hence there is an actual difference between the two choices.
I realize that people like to make fun of how repetitive some of the topics on the forums are, but there's a difference between that and locking repetitive topics. And others may argue that by directing the OP to existing threads, the mod is helping to faciitate discussion on the topic - but since when it is a mod's job to direct discussion?