Require mods to give right section

[BOOP]

I think mods should be required to give the correct section for a thread when removing it for being in the wrong section. If they know it's the wrong section, than they should know what the correct section is for it.

When users aren't told what the correction section is, it generally plays out in one of 2 ways:
A ) The user assumes the right section, if they're wrong they get slapped with another warning.
B ) The user is stuck waiting for a response from the mod for the correct section, which could easily be a few days to possibly a few weeks depending on the circumstances.

Additionally, there are two solutions to this:
A ) Telling the user what the correct section would be so they can re-post it in the right section.
B ) Moving the thread to the right section, and then notifying the user that it was in the wrong section.

For example, Diz got his thread removed from the Development section for being in the wrong section - and he is know stuck until that moderator can let him know what the right section would be.

I blurred out unrelated messages the the mod's name that removed the post. Let me know what yall think about this this suggestion

 

[Scroll32]

I didn't even know this was enforced.

 

[Harry]

I've just responded to Diz's warning PM. I'm not bothered if the community is aware of who issued the warning, as we'd only be tricking ourselves into expecting anonymity when mistakes are made.

Regardless, we do usually move the thread into the correct section when a 1.21 warning is issued as you've suggested. This can only happen though when there is a relevant section for the thread and when the user meets the requirements for that section (if requirements such as having Premium are in place).

Diz's thread is a particular outlier, due to the fact that the only really relevant place for it would be in his own product thread and that the thread was created due to a spat with a banned member (who has since created an account to evade to just reply to said thread).

 

[sock]

Harry isn't their general forums for this reason? General Discussion, Other Services, Other Products. In every section on MCM there is a category for threads that don't fit elsewhere, I'm sure it would've fit in whichever of those three was most appropriate, even General Discussion as a default... because it's discussion about anything to be fair.

 

[BOOP]

Diz's thread is a particular outlier, due to the fact that the only really relevant place for it would be in his own product thread and that the thread was created due to a spat with a banned member (who has since created an account to evade to just reply to said thread).

Gonna have to agree with sockeroo on this, there are many misc. sections that most threads should fit into.

Agreed.

Don't post farm on my thread, use the agree button and leave.

 

[CEO_Of_PEPE]

Gonna have to agree with sockeroo on this, there are many misc. sections that most threads should fit into.


Don't post farm on my thread, use the agree button and leave.

Didn't even know that was a thing but I'm really just saying that I agree.

 

[Harry]

Harry isn't their general forums for this reason? General Discussion, Other Services, Other Products. In every section on MCM there is a category for threads that don't fit elsewhere, I'm sure it would've fit in whichever of those three was most appropriate, even General Discussion as a default... because it's discussion about anything to be fair.

The General Discussion section isn't meant to be a place for miscellaneous threads, so there are threads that don't fit within the section such as in this case. We don't want to be taking arguments between members into their own threads when it should be dealt with privately (and especially not when one of them is banned as mentioned above).

 

[Mick]

I've just responded to Diz's warning PM. I'm not bothered if the community is aware of who issued the warning, as we'd only be tricking ourselves into expecting anonymity when mistakes are made.

Regardless, we do usually move the thread into the correct section when a 1.21 warning is issued as you've suggested. This can only happen though when there is a relevant section for the thread and when the user meets the requirements for that section (if requirements such as having Premium are in place).

Diz's thread is a particular outlier, due to the fact that the only really relevant place for it would be in his own product thread and that the thread was created due to a spat with a banned member (who has since created an account to evade to just reply to said thread).

Indeed. Denied, thanks for the suggestion