Basically the ability to lock your own threads if they go away from what you wanted the thread to be (especially in the WEPR forum). Or having the ability to edit your original post to include new information.
Well, editing posts has been pretty well covered. On locking your own threads...I could see where this would pose a problem. Here is an example:
John Doe creates a topic in WEPR about Christianity. John gets upset with the posts in his topic. So, John closes it. Then I come back behind John and re-open the topic. Then John comes back and closes it again.
"Regular" members would not abuse this power, but some others would.
Or they would lock the thread when they leave so no discussion happens without them. I think that overall this would be a terrible idea. Mostly just for the reason that you know that there are people who will abuse it.
Why would you close it? Because you see no fit reason why he should have done it? I just want to see your perspective...
It could be a legitimate discussion with good arguments and generally have a good feel about it. But John got butthurt because people are disagreeing with him, so he locks it to get the last word on the matter, thus stopping the discussion. A legitimate thread that is on topic and doesn't break any rules should be left open. (I actually have the same annoyance about a possible block feature, but that is for another thread)
Still what about being able to add to your OP? You wouldn't be able to delete anything you've previously said, to prevent people from completely changing their ideas, but you would be able to present more information.
I kinda like the idea of changing your posts over time no matter what, and just added an "edited by Cormyn on 2010-10-08 1722", maybe give them a chance to describe in one sentence what they changed, so it might look like:
This is my new post text, hope you like it
edited by Cormyn on 2010-10-08 1722 reason: needed to updated some incorrect information
heh, where's my edit button to correct my own typo?
=P The only thing I can see wrong with editing all your posts is you could say something, someone could respond, you edit your post, you never said it. It would only be a massive problem in the WEPR (I would guess) but still it could cause problems.
Obviously, you couldn't delete comments, the thread or anything like that. I think that it would be nice to have the power to lock your own threads, or possibly a new feature, hiding threads? I don't know a whole lot about that karma stuff on the new AG, but I'm pretty sure that has something to do with activity and good things you do. If your karma is at certain levels, you could have an increased variety of funvtions.
The only thing I can see wrong with editing all your posts is you could say something, someone could respond, you edit your post, you never said it. It would only be a massive problem in the WEPR (I would guess) but still it could cause problems.
That problem is mostly dealt with by locking out the ability to edit a post after a set amount of time.. ten minutes or so.
----
Where did the idea of locking one's own thread come from? It's a horrible idea. If they want their thread locked they can ask a moderator or an admin. Abuse, abuse, abuse.
One thing that is special about mods is that they are generally the people who know exactly when a thread needs to be locked. If not, another mod can decide. Should a member be able to lock their threads, especially if it's locked prematurely?
No. As Asherlee and Cenere noted, people who get upset with the threads they make for some reason may feel the need to unreasonably close it. I trust people who have reasonable purposes to be able to seek out a moderator or an administrator to have their thread locked for them. Why do we have moderators?
