Rules for locking threads

[onebuffalo]

I just added a thread in the sub Country Forum titled Billboard Year-End Charts-2016. I found out that Jon Pardi has the #1 Airplay single in Head Over Boots. Florida Georgia Line tops the Hot Country Songs list with H.O.L.Y.. I had posted congratulations to both artists for their accomplishments. Jhomes87 just deleted those. I feel that if you do not get that 'This post is 180 days old' warning, then it should be acceptable to keep posting on those threads (provided that new information is added, like this case). I have several Canadian country #1 singles and albums threads in the World Hits section of this website. I just completed the 2016 thread and added a post that the chart year was over. That was after getting the '180 days' warning. I did not get a warning then, so why is it that my posts were deleted today? The Pardi single peaked on the Airplay chart in August and the Florida Georgia Line single peaked in May. Had those happened a hundred years ago, I can see deleting the posts. Only if you get the warning, the posts should be deleted. Thanks.

[Deleted]

The "180 days" message is standard and appears on every thread (that hasn't been posted in for at least 180 days) but it really only applies to the parts of the board where the singles and albums threads are. For example, someone can bump an old thread in the country sub-forum or in the Lounge and no one will care -- that message wasn't designed for those threads.

But in the specific case you brought up here, it's not necessary to have that information (that Jon Pardi is #1 on one year-end chart and that FGL is #1 on another year-end chart) posted in multiple threads. Having a separate thread for the year-end charts is more than sufficient and any "congratulations" posts can be made there. There's really no need to bump old threads for songs that have been recurrent for months, even if the last post in those threads was technically within the last 180 days.

Staff members typically don't delete posts but we reserve the right to for situations like this, when the information has already been posted in one place.

[onebuffalo]

It happened again. Instead of my question getting answered, the thread got locked. The previous post happened three months ago. What gives?

I take it back. The post got moved, but the question did not get answered.

[maine]

You literally did the same exact thing as you did before.

[lyhom]

Feb 1, 2017 18:10:05 GMT -5 onebuffalo said:

It happened again. Instead of my question getting answered, the thread got locked. The previous post happened three months ago. What gives?

I take it back. The post got moved, but the question did not get answered.

there's your answer, bud

[onebuffalo]

Feb 1, 2017 19:20:15 GMT -5 lyhom said:

Feb 1, 2017 18:10:05 GMT -5 onebuffalo said:

It happened again. Instead of my question getting answered, the thread got locked. The previous post happened three months ago. What gives?

I take it back. The post got moved, but the question did not get answered.

there's your answer, bud

It's not reason enough to lock the thread. A legitimate question was presented. How would you feel if it happened to you? The only way I found out was clicking on profile where I saw I had a few notifications. If that did not happen, I would still be mad that the question did not get answered. After all, it is the job of the administrators/moderators to serve the Pulse membership.

[onebuffalo]

It happened again yesterday. A poster asked a question in a Chase Rice thread and the thread got locked. The previous post was three months ago. I would like to see the following:

1. Answer the question. It was a legitimate one and deserved to be answered. If someone can't do that, that's fine, but do NOT lock the thread before the question gets answered.

2. Lower the threshold to 90 days instead of the current 180 to declare it to be an old thread. Put that in the Pulse rules so it's black upon white.

Really, folks. I've been working in customer service jobs for 33.5 years. If I treated my customers like some posters get treated here, I would be fired. Please, administrators and/or moderators, please be more 'customer friendly'. Thanks.

[Kurt]

Hi. As you know, threads for singles are locked (or occasionally moved into Non-Singles on the rare occasion that there's something worthwhile to discuss about the song beyond its radio performance, for example, the non-radio resurgence of Carly Rae Jepsen's "Run Away With Me" following its use as a Vine meme and subsequent streaming increase) when the radio run for the single has ended.

As jhomes87 mentioned previously, the 180-days message appears automatically based on the date of the most recent post in a thread. That's not a steadfast rule (though perhaps it should be) and was really implemented to prevent bumping of years-old threads in The Lounge or Your Opinion Please? that was happening too frequently several months ago.

Do I think this is a perfect solution? No – between the time a single has finished its chart run and the two-year mark at which point a song can have a thread started in the Nostalgia forum, there isn't a suitable place for discussion (the album thread becomes the most likely option, but those don't always exist, especially for country artists). Do I agree that a better solution to closing this thread would've been to address the poster's question before locking it? Yes, and I've taken that step now.

Finally, I feel it's important to make the reminder that, while it's natural to compare the role of a moderator or administrator to that of someone in the customer service field, there's an important distinction in that you (and I as well: though I'm a web developer, customer service is a vital element of the client work I perform) have set hours during which you're expected to complete that role, and are incentivized in doing so through a paycheck. Zero members of our staff receive payment for their work – revenue from the ads you see on this forum goes to ProBoards in exchange for the fact that they host our website for free – and the work we do is entirely volunteer-based. It's fair to think of staff members as performing a customer service role; not so much to be condescending toward staffers' work and suggest the dynamic is the same as a paid, trained, professional role.

Thanks for your feedback and understanding.

[onebuffalo]

While I appreciate your point of view, Kurt, you have to put yourself in someone else's shoes and walk a mile in them. You wouldn't want to be treated that way, either. If there is a legitimate question out there, it should be answered, no matter what. Whether you know the answer or someone else does is besides the point. How does Pulse look when administrators and/or moderators get to lock threads and drive off without an explanation? I recently p.m.'d someone because they brought up a thread from 2005. I explained it to them it got locked because it was a very old thread. I do not know if someone else explained it to them, so I took it upon myself to do so (for the record, the member in question is new to Pulse). If there are rules here at Pulse, they should be enforced fairly and justly. Whether I ask a question or someone else does, in both cases, it should be answered. Like I said before, if the 180 day rule is in effect, it should stay that way until it changes. If it does, please put it in the Pulse rules so everyone knows about it (and leave it as is). I do not think that is too much to ask for. I still love it here at Pulse and want to see everybody being treated the same. Thank you for your time.

[Devil Marlena Nylund]

I think much of this is (or should be) explained in the Rules and Regulations thread that every member, no matter how long they've been here whether ten minutes or ten years, are expected to have read and understand. Beyond that, in my experience, there isn't a discussion possible that can't be had on this board. If an old thread gets bumped in the radio forums, it'll get locked understandably. If someone has a question related to that song, it can go in the artist thread that almost always exists in the appropriate forum. Perhaps this isn't made clear in the Rules & Regulations and perhaps mods can explain that when locking threads bumped by new posters.

[Deleted]

Apr 13, 2017 10:49:07 GMT -5 onebuffalo said:

It happened again yesterday. A poster asked a question in a Chase Rice thread and the thread got locked. The previous post was three months ago. I would like to see the following:

1. Answer the question. It was a legitimate one and deserved to be answered. If someone can't do that, that's fine, but do NOT lock the thread before the question gets answered.

2. Lower the threshold to 90 days instead of the current 180 to declare it to be an old thread. Put that in the Pulse rules so it's black upon white.

Really, folks. I've been working in customer service jobs for 33.5 years. If I treated my customers like some posters get treated here, I would be fired. Please, administrators and/or moderators, please be more 'customer friendly'. Thanks.

Let's do some math. You certainly have lots of experience. 33.5 years but how long at each job? If you had a two or three customer service jobs in that time then you and your tone are doing well. But if you had like over 10 jobs in the field in that time then you were doing s**tty job. I will say you're very persistent and diligent I always assumed you were in the postal delivery industry or accounting. I never pegged you were paid to talk to paying customers. I learn more about you everyday!

[Deleted]

But im always here for a good staff dragging yasssss. Paid or unpaid substandard treatment of Coco is no cool!