The bolded are more calculation errors about posters. You seem to be forgetting that bans and post deletions by moderators are already quite rare and a small fraction of those rare bans/deletions are problematic in any way.

Even when they could be (if you squint really hard) seen as problematic, they rarely involve anything approaching an intelligent or even a vaguely interesting conversation.

More importantly, it is mostly the OP in bad threads who is at fault for creating a bad thread. To use an analogy, putting them in charge is like putting someone who shouldn't be in charge in charge.

That's the problem. And it should be the prerogative of the person who created the thread to remove posts that add nothing to the discussion. If that offends some people then they can stay out of that person's threads.

If a thread has a lot of people posting in it an argument can be made it is a good thread because people care enough, and are interested enough, to post in it.
_______

Whether a thread is good or bad is a matter of opinion. An argument can be made bad threads are the ones nobody really cares enough to post in. Just like an argument can be made a bad music album is one nobody really cares enough to buy.

u Nah. It is never "your" thread, so no prerogative exists. Common mistake.* Bad threads need to be deleted and I imagine that you do understand that people think the threads they start are worthwhile to a far greater extent than they actually are.

One could make that argument, I guess. I've never seen it successfully made. Mostly because you can post absolute **** and people will come out of the woodwork just to say it is a shitty thread or make fun of the OP or try to helpfully cure the thread starter of their mental defect. This is hardly the stuff of "intelligent discussion" that the new owners mentioned as a goal for the forums.

Again, one could make those arguments, I guess. They would be wrong, but nonetheless, the arguments could be made.

You will note that if you **** on the table during your next business meeting, it will lead to significantly more discussion than saying something useful and intelligent about some important business matter. People would be talking about it for years!

*This lack of ownership can be overcome by purchasing a domain name and server space. Obviously, one must adhere to local laws, but otherwise it solves the problem

Pretty sure it's only the unabashed white nationalists that a lot of these no-avatar 17-post guys want unbanned.

And the guy with the Penn State hat.

Unban everyone. Welcome to 4Chan.

Unban everyone..then permaban Rapini

Overmoderation is the main killer of online forum (not just this one). Moderators think too highly of themselves and think their value is a lot higher than it actually is. Those positions attract a certain type of individual.

I’m already here wtffff

annie duke for mod!

Avg post count of for accounts that say mods suck: 4

i talk a lot of **** about mods on this site but there's only a few who are actually legit terrible

my own personal feelings/complaints aside, i think they do a pretty good job here overall

I dont really give a **** about cursing and vulgarity in general. However I believe spammers, personal attacks, and threats need to be taken seriously and dealt with by moderators. Outside of those lines its game on.

I for one welcome our new overlords. May your reign be bountiful.

This is awesome. Normally we can only break out thefor individual threads. Now we get to do it for the entire website.

Hmmm.... I wonder why the people complaining about mods barely have any posts.

While we're asking for things to be returned, can we get SgtRJ's buttsecks thread back please? Wasn't it removed for the advertisers?

Imagine arguing the unmoderated internet is a good idea in 2021 - after seeing what happened on newsgroups and sites like 4chan.

Unless... weebay.gif ... that's what you want to happen to twoplustwo. Then it makes perfect sense.

I think one big advantage of allowing a thread creator to mod/edit his own thread would be it would attract poker celebrities to start posting their own threads under their real name. If these people knew they could quickly delete the trolls and reputation/character assassins (who hide behind aliases) they might definitely be tempted to start their own threads. I have to believe a guy the Daniel Negreanu would love to have a fan interaction thread on this site but is hesitant because he knows the trolls would come out of woodwork. This doesn't mean he won't answer tough questions, it just means he will be able to nuke those posters whose sole goal is to create havoc.

Also a guy like Mike Matusow would probably love to have a thread to help promote his podcast. At the beginning of the thread he might say he prefers not to talk about certain topics (like drugs or his personal life). Then if someone did come into the thread and violated his specific request he could delete their posts and maybe block them if need be.

Yes, right now there are few if any poker celebrities who post threads under their real name. Giving them the power to edit their own threads could change that to the benefit of the poker community.

Are you really going to keep bumping or replying to your own posts/thread, again?

When I want to add a "new unique idea" to an old post it saves a lot of time typing. I like saving time. I wish you had new ideas instead of complaining about my format and one of my 3 year old threads.

Haha right, the 3-year old thread that everytime it rightfully drifted down to page 2, you bumped it back up to the top with some inane comment just for the bump, then act all butthurt when you started getting grief about the lame idea in the first place lmao.

Subforums are a potential way to do that, and I've made that suggestion in my communications with the new ownership.

I'd be a little annoyed if people kept bringing up my shitty old threads as well. But why you bring it up yourself, I have no idea. Because guess what happens? What just did, you get a reply about it.

Let it go.

Maybe the 6 or 7 times "The Fly" keeps bringing it up over the last two years (including 2x's in this thread) has something to do with it. Why don't you admonish him about that?

And you and The Fly might think the 3 year old thread was shitty but it did have over 100 different posters who left over 500 posts. You've got to wonder why those 100 posters chose to post in an allegedly shitty thread.

I'm not admonishing you for doing anything - if you want to bring it up again, go for it. I'd have thought you'd want to move on.

Edit to add: But I see now that he indeed did bring it up first, so it makes a little more sense.

as someone who has seen more notifications and PMs than I could count that are created in an effort to get things in their threads deleted, I can tell you with absolute certainty that you are wrong.

Also, what character trait is it that people typically associate with a terrible mod? A jackass who is abusing what power they have in order to pump themselves up or lord it over others. Guess what would happen if absolutely anyone could be a mod of their thread? You're going to have a crap ton of people with fevered little egos laying claim to their little slice of "I run this mother ****er!". You'd get 15 posts on the same thing because "so and so is an ******* and their thread sucks, so here's mine". It would be a giant **** show and the forum would be an unreadable mess. Youd have to have mods to moderate how threads are being moderated, in which case you haven't really changed anything, just added a bunch of unnecessary complexity.