Andy Clough said:
fr0g said:
John, could we perhaps get personal abuse warned and edited out rather than a thread lock. that way someone can't "get a thread locked" out of spite...
With regard to your first sentence, that's often what we do. And as for your second, we don't lock threads "out of spite". In fact, since we moved to a policy of external moderation, fewer threads have been locked and there's usually a discussion among the mods before doing so. In this particular case, we all felt it had gone on long enough, was going round in circles and had become abusive.
fr0g meant that users can do things that they know will get the thread locked, not that you, WHF, have locked it out of spite.
The thread in question should have died long before it did. The reason why it did not is because the mods did a great job of trying to avoid a thread like this one.
We all know how threads like that go, and certain other threads too, and it impresses no one (no, it really doesn't). Indeed, it makes many posters look pretty bad.
So there. In future, I shall only enter such threads to mock those who seem to think it's so important.
So there; I have spoken, and it will make no difference, just like when you* speak.
*No, not him, everyone.