Let me just go through the threads locked on the first page right now:
1. Is possible to get into shape without supplements, and how?
2. What foods to eat/not eat?
3. Best way to lose weight for a 17 year old?
4. Guy asking seemingly random questions about MMA classes.
NONE of these threads would have been started by anyone who had read the rules and FAQs.
One of the biggest concerns on this board before I was a mod was the preponderance of threads that showed a complete disregard for the rules/FAQs. There are several problems with these sort of threads. One, they are an absolute magnet for bad advice. Every time we get one of these threads, posters I've never seen in D&S before come in and post what seem to be quotes from "Good Morning America"'s health segments with a little bit of "Self" magazine thrown in.
Two, the OP's get flamed. Of course, they return fire. That's obviously not productive, either.
The whole point of having rules and FAQs is to elevate the discourse, so we're talking about original and interesting topics instead of the same broad, general, superficial topics ("how do I lose weight," "how do get healthy," etc.) all the time. Another characteristic of a worthy thread is individuality/uniqueness. "I want to lose weight" does not represent a unique problem, and therefore only the most general answers (i.e., those found it the FAQs) can be provided. It is similar to someone asking in S&C, "How do I get strong?" Unless there is some extraordinary circumstance, the answer is always going be something along the lines of "squat, bench, deadlift, press..." and so forth.
On the other hand, if the OP describes why his situation is particularly difficult or unique, then we have the seeds of an interesting discussion.
And there's nothing wrong with multiple threads about a similar topic, so long as the OP brings something new or interesting to the table. However, many of the threads I lock essentially amount to questions of definition. How many threads do we need to tell people what whey protein is?
I think it is reasonable to lock threads that show an ignorance of the rules and FAQs. If you would rather see the sorts of threads I lock remain open, communicate as much in this thread.
I think this forum can do better, but it hinges on people actually reading the rules/FAQs. You don't have to agree with them (though they're hardly controversial), but you need to speak the language before we can have debates about these topics. As it stands now, people are starting threads in complete ignorance of the FAQs/rules, and in accordance with the rules, I lock those threads.
If you disagree with that policy, then we probably shouldn't have FAQs or rules at all, beyond the basic board rules. There would be no point. Why take the time to educate yourself when you can ask whatever you want of the board, no matter how repetitive/ridiculous those questions are?
I don't think I would want to mod that board.
