Last edited Sun Dec 11, 2011, 10:08 PM - Edit history (1)
Or that the discussion was not of interest to the LGBT community?
I believe the question the hosts have to answer in order to lock a thread is the latter (does it fall outside the purpose of the LGBT group). That is a far narrower question than whether the thread should be closed. While the hosts might think it best to close the thread for any number of reasons, my understanding is that the only valid reason for the hosts to close a thread, which otherwise follows the DU rules, is if the answer to the latter question is that the discussion topic is not of interest to the LGBT community.
If you do believe the discussion is not of interest to the LGBT community, I would like to understand why you believe that - because it just doesn't match what I saw happening in the thread.
For purposes of this thread, I don't actually need you to answer them publicly - or to me - but that is the question I believe hosts should be able to answer before locking a thread, and I believe giving that explanation to the thread poster would ultimately make less work for the hosts.
(On reviewing the options open to the hosts, I see that locking a thread without explanation is also permitted - that would have been a better option in this case. I would not personally have objected to a lock without an explanation (followed by the PM explanation I was given when I petitioned to remove the lock). I actually suggested to HillWilliam removing the "off topic" explanation and adding a comment pointing to the discussion I had started in the Help and metadata forum. I do - as a general matter, though - believe that unfettered ability to lock posts is an option that will likely lead to rapid host burn out if we don't provide some concrete guidance (and support for hosts exercising that option).)
= new reply since forum marked as read