If I don't receive complaints about locked channels or regular channels I usually don't act on it unless it is breaking some ts/server rules. This topic is very difficult to discuss because locked channels are very subjective in the way that it depends on who made them and for what reason.
Regarding Locked Channels
- Thread starter TheSpeedy_
- Start date
It is not always immediately apparent when something is doing harm, IRL if a police officer has reason to suspect someone is violating the law they're allowed to investigate to some extent (ie a personal search, or checking the boot of a car). Making an inquiry into the purpose of a channel is not doing anyone any harm.
Furthermore, some actions can have long term implications, imagine you have a rabbit in your garden, not really a problem, a bit of a nuisance but you can deal with it. What if that rabbit gives birth, now you've got lots of rabbits, what if they give birth? Suddenly your garden is wrecked because you didn't deal with that one rabbit that showed up in your garden in the first place.
The way I see it locked channels are OK for people to have within reason. The staff need them for reasons that should be obvious to us all, such as -
-Staff meetings.
-Discussing topics that may or may not be controversial, or are topics of current or past heated debate, but that they need to address nonetheless.
-Some things they need to talk about in depth, and it just wouldn't do for any random person to listen in on what they're saying.
As for non-staff members, I think the use of locked channels should be more tightly regulated myself, and that there should be a list of rules and reasons the person who created the channel should be subject to following should a staff member ask. In my opinion reasons for non-staff members to have locked channels that are acceptable are -
-They want to have a closed discussion about a specific topic with only a few select people participating.
-They're listening to music.
-They're gaming with a group of people and want privacy.
-They're discussing a topic which would not be considered acceptable by the general public to discuss in front of a minor(Adult content, etc.).
I undoubtedly have missed a few valid reasons, which is why it's important to have input from other members on issues such as this, and am open to criticism of course. As a final thought I believe that the Valar and Enforcers should be keeping a close eye on and checking in on people who are using locked channels to make sure it's for a reason that is both valid and acceptable. Otherwise I can see how this would be used as a method of excluding specific people from certain groups, and I'm not thinking of anyone specific here.
Have a nice evening - nAugrim29
-Staff meetings.
-Discussing topics that may or may not be controversial, or are topics of current or past heated debate, but that they need to address nonetheless.
-Some things they need to talk about in depth, and it just wouldn't do for any random person to listen in on what they're saying.
As for non-staff members, I think the use of locked channels should be more tightly regulated myself, and that there should be a list of rules and reasons the person who created the channel should be subject to following should a staff member ask. In my opinion reasons for non-staff members to have locked channels that are acceptable are -
-They want to have a closed discussion about a specific topic with only a few select people participating.
-They're listening to music.
-They're gaming with a group of people and want privacy.
-They're discussing a topic which would not be considered acceptable by the general public to discuss in front of a minor(Adult content, etc.).
I undoubtedly have missed a few valid reasons, which is why it's important to have input from other members on issues such as this, and am open to criticism of course. As a final thought I believe that the Valar and Enforcers should be keeping a close eye on and checking in on people who are using locked channels to make sure it's for a reason that is both valid and acceptable. Otherwise I can see how this would be used as a method of excluding specific people from certain groups, and I'm not thinking of anyone specific here.
Have a nice evening - nAugrim29
Last edited: