iansjack wrote:
nexos wrote:
vvaltchev wrote:
In general, I believe we should establish the rule that if a moderator is involved in the conversation, he/she shouldn't be the one to eventually lock the topic. That should be done by a different (neutral) moderator.
In theory, but when there's only one active mod who can do that, that doesn't work.
That’s not the case with that forum, so it’s not germane to the OP’s point. One of the more prolific poster in these forums is also a moderator.
It looks like there are 3 (maybe 4?) active mods. Of course the other mods may be active and just not login too often, but looking at last-logins over time, they are the 3 most active.
One of them (actually the same poster I believe you're talking about) doesn't have access to most mod controls (IIRC).
But for the most part, I do agree with you. I know that this forum takes a pretty lax approach to moderation typically. I know this forum has discussed this many times, and I don't feel like delving into the politics of OSDev.org. But with that being said, switching to a heavy-handed approach when you're involved in the discussion (and especially when the discussion hadn't even gotten out of hand) does bother me. Many discussions that really should have been locked remained open, but then one the moderator is involved in gets locked all of a sudden. Doesn't sound good to me.
For the record, I
do actually agree with klange in the actual discussion. But I think locking that thread was a little unnecessary.
devc1 wrote:
Whoever the owner of this SerenityOS, if you want to compete or users to use your OS. You should update your Windows XP GUI.
Err, that's actually one of the
explicit design goals of SerenityOS. It says in the README: "SerenityOS is a love letter to '90s user interfaces with a custom Unix-like core." It's more of just a hobby, not really an OS designed to "compete" (whatever that really means).