FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » Pledge to Not Delete Threads (Page 8)

  This topic comprises 9 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9   
Author Topic: Pledge to Not Delete Threads
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
kat,
But PJ does in fact lock threads and delete/edit posts because people are being nasty, correct?

I mean, if he does this, then it's not a matter of, as you claimed, him not doing it, but rather of your not agreeing with his judgement or possibly some other reason.

---

edit: Here are a few instances where PJ appears to have done this:

http://www.hatrack.com/cgi-bin/ubbmain/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=048986;p=0&r=nfx

http://www.hatrack.com/cgi-bin/ubbmain/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=048714;p=3&r=nfx

http://www.hatrack.com/cgi-bin/ubbmain/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=048735;p=2&r=nfx

Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kwea
Member
Member # 2199

 - posted      Profile for Kwea   Email Kwea         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by MightyCow:


I feel like there is an obvious connection that one could make.

And it is because of statements like this, based on subjective feelings but implying some sort of moral superiority, that I don't like the idea and won't participate in it.


Even though there are people on that list who would be more likely to delete a thread than I am.

Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mucus
Member
Member # 9735

 - posted      Profile for Mucus           Edit/Delete Post 
On the other hand:
quote:
Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact us immediately by email. We have the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary. This is a manual process, however, so please realize that we may not be able to remove or edit particular messages immediately.
link
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MightyCow
Member
Member # 9253

 - posted      Profile for MightyCow           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Kwea:
quote:
Originally posted by MightyCow:


I feel like there is an obvious connection that one could make.

And it is because of statements like this, based on subjective feelings but implying some sort of moral superiority, that I don't like the idea and won't participate in it.


Even though there are people on that list who would be more likely to delete a thread than I am.

Oh the irony! It burns!
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kwea
Member
Member # 2199

 - posted      Profile for Kwea   Email Kwea         Edit/Delete Post 
Squick, it seems to me that they do this as little as possible as things stand now. I have been to other boards where the power of the mod has been expanded, and I dislike those boards because the intent of the mod seems to be to lock thread he disagrees with.


One of the things I have always liked about Hatrack is that the mods, both PJ and before him KK, only step in where there is no other way of continuing the conversation. Even then, a lot of threads are locked for a day or three, then re-opened....sort of a cooling-off period.


Also, locked threads are still accessible.


Then again, I don't think that all cases of thread deletion are the same.

[ August 10, 2007, 01:40 PM: Message edited by: Kwea ]

Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
Kwea,
I'm not really sure how you meant that. It sounds like you are implying that kat just disagrees with PJ's judgement, not that PJ doesn't do this, but you seem to be raising it as an objection to what I said.

Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kwea
Member
Member # 2199

 - posted      Profile for Kwea   Email Kwea         Edit/Delete Post 
Let me try to clarify. [Smile]


I think there are a lot of times where a mod has discresion. Some times things may not be pleasent, but since no one is violating the TOS they let it go. I appreciate that, even when it is a conversation I wish would end, because I have been at sites where the mods are too quick to shut conversations down.


Other times the violations are so obvious the thread gets shut down right away.

I think that PJ has a duty, and does a good job of it, to stop obvious violations of the TOS. Anything other than that is beyond the scope of his duties.


There are times where it is a thin line, and it isn't always easy to tell where it should be drawn, but compared to other places Hatrack has a great balance between attempting to keep things civil and allow discussions to repair themselves whenever possible.


I think PJ jumps in very rarely, and as a last resort. Asking him to do so more frequently would be asking him to change his role as a mod.

Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
I still don't know how that fits in to the conversation so far. Could you tie it to what kat and I were saying?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
docmagik
Member
Member # 1131

 - posted      Profile for docmagik   Email docmagik         Edit/Delete Post 
Alright, let me see if I can explain this really clearly. (For me, that means at some length.)

Here's why I think the Sneeches analogy is apt.

Because ostensibly, Sneeches are all about positivity. They're all about how there's something good we're celebrating. But it's really obvious, that the underbelly of their behavior (if you'll pardon the joke) is negative, and has negative results.

As much as Dag says that he would take no offense at a thread called, "Pledge not to post Law Articles and Case Summaries," the fact is that it would be a negative thread. It would be a negative thread specifically directed at Dag. It would be a whole bunch of people who were coming together to say that Dag's posts were weaking Hatrack, and that if more people could be made to post in un-Daglike ways, the forum would be a better place.

It wouldn't actually help anything--the people who post like Dag would still post like that, the people who didn't like it would post vehement support. Nobody would read the thread saying anything like, "Whew, I am so glad that Goofy McLongbottom isn't going to start quoting Chemerinsky."

To deny that such a thread was simply a "We're anti-Dagonee club" would be either ignorant or just deliberately obtuse.

Now, you've stated lots of reasons why you've started this thread that weren't so much anti-anybody. Lots of people have given you a lot of benifit of the doubt about your motives.

What everybody seems to be having a hard time understanding is that, regardless of original motive, this thread still can (and, I think, does) have exactly the same feel and result as the anti-Dagonee thread I describe above.

Someone who wants to tell people they're not going to delete any threads any more doesn't need a pledge. They can just post and say so.

Someone who deletes a thread that they later regret deleting, because they've cooled off or because someone contacts them and quietly and calmly talks about what a certain post meant to them--that person can apologize in a way they feel is appropriate and try to win back trust that way.

So this thread isn't filling a need that otherwise wouldn't be filled. In fact, the only unique purpouse it seems to be filling is creating a way for people who have taken the same side of an issue to be able to identify each other and rally behind each other.

Now it has been suggested that pointing out that this thread seems intolerant and cliquish is similarly intolerant and cliquish. That we're actually being more intolerant than you because we find the thread distasteful.

This is silly. That would be like if someone called the makers of the anti-Dagonee thread out on the negativity of their thread and expressed distate at it, and the original posters replied, "Why do you got to hate? Why are you being so down on us? Why are you trying to control the way we post?"

Nobody's against your opinions on thread deletion. We're okay with them. We accept them. We think you should have the right to have those opinions.

But if it had been done in a way similar to the "thread deletion poll" thread, where everyone could voice their own side and everybody could find out the way that everybody stood on every issue, with the underlying assumption that all opinions were equally viable, that would actually give everybody all the information they needed in a way that would be much, much harder to construe in a negative way.

This thread can easily be construed in a very, very negative way. Especially given the current climate on Hatrack, it can even be seen not just as a general attack, but as a specific attack on the people most recently involved in this. And that's the part that I, personally, find the most distateful.

Hopes this helps clarify.

Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kwea
Member
Member # 2199

 - posted      Profile for Kwea   Email Kwea         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Javert Hugo:
The moderator has not expressed an interest in regulating relations between posters that do not fall within the domain of the ToS.

More specifically, although the moderator may agree that someone is being something unmentionable, he does not feel it is his role to police that.

Advocating taking it to the mod would require expanding the role of the mod. While I would completely trust Pop's assessments of when someone is nasty enough to be deserve to be shut down, that is not his job, I don't think he wants it, and the TPTB have not made it so.

We are left to ourselves, closer to both anarchy and freedom. The ability to delete threads is essential.

Here is where a lot of the same points I made were discussed. It DID take me a second to remember kat's alt, which is why I was a little confused when you first asked me.

I think the ability to stop something you started is important, although I personally have too much respect for most posters to delete a whole thread because I have an issue with it.

I can't think of a reason I would delete an established thread, but I am not willing to give up the right to do so.

[Big Grin]


As far s post counts go, I do think it is a useful measure of at least one thing.....the amount of personal investment a poster has in the community. I don't think a low post counts counts against someone, because I judge more on content than on longevity, but a high post counts can indicate a level of involvement in this community.

Whether that involvement has been positive or not is another issue completely.

[ August 10, 2007, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: Kwea ]

Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
We've gotten to this point where the deletion of threads seems like this magical indicator of someone's reliability and character. And it's absurd.
Which is actually why I think editing the forum software to track that information is an elegant solution. For those people who do care about tracking this information, it removes the perceived need to manually maintain a list; for those who do not, their disinclination to participate is not a publicly-viewable exclusionary action but rather a matter of not particularly caring one way or another.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
Kwea,
I don't see where what you quoted and what you said match up.

I'll clarify. kat said that it is not PJ's job nor something he does to decide when someone is being nasty enough to shut a thread down or (by extention) edit or delete someone's posts.
quote:
While I would completely trust Pop's assessments of when someone is nasty enough to be deserve to be shut down, that is not his job, I don't think he wants it, and the TPTB have not made it so.
I demonstrated that this is not the case. PJ clearly does do this and it is explicitly laid out as part of his job.

It seems to me like people are saying that he doesn't do it enough (in kat's opinion), which, to me, would suggest that she disagrees with his judgement.

Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
docmagik
Member
Member # 1131

 - posted      Profile for docmagik   Email docmagik         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
It seems to me like people are saying that he doesn't do it enough (in their opinion), which, to me, would suggest that they disagree with his judgement.
No. Nobody's saying that. We're saying that Papa draws the line WAAAAAAYYYYYY out in the extreme, letting lots of stuff go, but that somebody might make a few individual posts that the thread starter sees as beyond the pale for reasons that wouldn't fit in the scope of Papa's duties.

In some cases, the thread starter would be okay with it, so it's not really a "general rule" kind of thing, like papa would normally take care of, but maybe for that person, on that day, it was just too much to handle.

Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
I don't see how that doesn't mean that they disagree with Papa's judgement.

It's not they disagree when he doesn't think those posts merit deletion, just that they think that those posts merit deletion and he doesn't?

That doesn't make sense to me. Could some explain how either that makes sense or I misunderstood what you are saying?

Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
docmagik
Member
Member # 1131

 - posted      Profile for docmagik   Email docmagik         Edit/Delete Post 
Because Papa shouldn't have to cater to personal idiosyncracies. Even people with personal idiosyncracies know that.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert Hugo
Member
Member # 3980

 - posted      Profile for Javert Hugo   Email Javert Hugo         Edit/Delete Post 
Squick, this is an area that is officially unknowable. You are declaring as fact something that has not been announced by the mod himself. It may be your opinion, but you're guessing. And you're wrong.
Posts: 1753 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
twinky
Member
Member # 693

 - posted      Profile for twinky   Email twinky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by docmagik:
In some cases, the thread starter would be okay with it, so it's not really a "general rule" kind of thing, like papa would normally take care of, but maybe for that person, on that day, it was just too much to handle.

I think this is actually more likely to be true for someone posting in a thread they didn't start, since there are a lot more posts than there are threads. And in this case, the person wouldn't be able to delete the thread.

I suppose what I'm saying is that I don't see "thread starter" as a special class of "poster" in the context of a given thread, and would prefer that thread starters were not made a special class of poster by the forum software settings. As I said in BannaOJ's poll, though, I recognize that this isn't likely to be changed; I'm simply offering my opinion because it's relevant.

I won't delete threads or posts or make unlabeled edits, but I haven't taken the pledge, either.

[Edited to add quotes around "poster." Also, the obvious deletion exception for duplicate threads/posts in the case of forum burps applies.]

Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
I don't see how that answers the dilemma here. People have idiosyncracies that make them disagree with PJ's decisions on what merits deletion. They still disagree on what merits deletion.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert Hugo
Member
Member # 3980

 - posted      Profile for Javert Hugo   Email Javert Hugo         Edit/Delete Post 
If what you are saying were true, then posters' ability to delete threads would be disabled.
Posts: 1753 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
twinky
Member
Member # 693

 - posted      Profile for twinky   Email twinky         Edit/Delete Post 
Squick, I think what they're saying is that there are things a person might think merits deletion that fall outside the scope of the moderator's purview to delete things as defined by the user agreement.

In other words, Pop might feel a post merits deletion but feel that it would be improper for him to delete it. I think that's what Kat is saying you can't know.

Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
Well, nastiness, which is what we are talking about here, is explicitly covered by the TOS:
quote:
You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You also agree that you will not use this forum to try to convert people to your own religious beliefs, or to disparage others for their own religious beliefs. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this BB.
kat started off saying that PJ doesn't have or play this role, which is clearly false.

Now, he doesn't do it all the time, which I agree with, but he obviously does make a decision on what to come down on and what not to. kat seems to disagree with the criteria he uses to make this decision, while maintaining that she doesn't.

---

edit: Also from the TOS
quote:
we reserve the right to delete any message for any or no reason whatsoever.

Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert Hugo
Member
Member # 3980

 - posted      Profile for Javert Hugo   Email Javert Hugo         Edit/Delete Post 
Mr. Squicky, if the admins considered that the mod would delete every thread that needed deleting, then posters would not have the ability to delete threads.

Also, you dropped some nuance there.

Posts: 1753 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
twinky
Member
Member # 693

 - posted      Profile for twinky   Email twinky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law.
It doesn't say in there that those are the criteria for thread or post deletion, though I can see how one might think that's implied.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MightyCow
Member
Member # 9253

 - posted      Profile for MightyCow           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Javert Hugo:
Mr. Squicky, if the admins considered that the mod would delete every thread that needed deleting, then posters would not have the ability to delete threads.

Javert Hugo, this is an area that is officially unknowable. You are declaring as fact something that has not been announced by the mod himself. It may be your opinion, but you're guessing. And you're wrong.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Mr. Squicky, if the admins considered that the mod would delete every thread that needed deleting, then posters would not have the ability to delete threads.
How does that follow?

We've already established that in the software used, there aren't separate settings for deleting a post and deleting a thread. It is entirely possible that they wanted to preserve the ability for someone to delete their own posts. I certainly can't say anything on that for sure.

And that's all besides the point. You were saying that PJ doesn't do this, which is obviously false. He does. You seem to disagree with the criteria he uses to make this decision.

You can report nastiness to PJ and he will make a judgement on it, actign on it if he feels it is warranted. It appears the reason why you don't seem to consider this an acceptible option is that you don't agree with the decisions he makes.

Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
It doesn't say in there that those are the criteria for thread or post deletion, though I can see how one might think that's implied.
Forget implied. It is established (in the part I included in the edit) that they reserve the right to delete any posts for no reason whatsoever, let alone egregious violations of the terms explicitly laid out in the TOS.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert Hugo
Member
Member # 3980

 - posted      Profile for Javert Hugo   Email Javert Hugo         Edit/Delete Post 
I'm saying that Pop thinks people are jerks but doesn't want to expand his moderator role to protecting everyone from them.

Hmm...officially, that is unknowable. Okay. This is utterly unknowable and until Pop himself dilineates exactly what the criteria and what he thinks about people deleting threads, there is no absolute knowledge to be reached.

On the one hand, there is a list of things people promise not to do. On the other, the ability to delete threads is given. Based on the evidence, it could go either way. Although I think my way is more persuasive.

Posts: 1753 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
docmagik
Member
Member # 1131

 - posted      Profile for docmagik   Email docmagik         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
People have idiosyncracies that make them disagree with PJ's decisions on what merits deletion. They still disagree on what merits deletion.
Come on. I don't think I want the police having the authority to solve all my problems for me, but that doesn't mean that I don't think my problems should be solved.

The idea that "If something needs to be done, than a person in authority must have the authority to do it," is silly.

A basketball game that one person considered rough another would consider fun. Ultimately, it's still the guy with the ball who gets to decide if this is the kind of game he wants to bring his ball to. Not some cop who's paid to act as ref who sits at the city playground.

For example, let's say that I had posted some stuff about my kids. Some people, knowing me, might post some teasing replies that, knowing me, they'd be okay with. But they didn't know my kids, and they didn't know my daughter was really sensitive.

It was just teasing, it was okay, and it was within the terms of service--nothing Papa needs to get his busy Janitorial head in a lather about when there's deliberate vindictiveness out there to be dealt with.

But I decide that I don't want to run the risk of my kid reading it at some point. I delete the thread.

If it had been in another thread, I wouldn't be able to delete that, sure, but I also wouldn't have posted about my sensitive kid where I didn't have that extra bit of control.

Look, let's talk about this.

I already addressed how we need to question it when we think somebody just closed a thread because they didn't like where it was going.

But let's say, just for arguement's sake, that somebody really did just, "Take their ball and go home." They deleted the thread because they didn't like where it was going.

There's lots of talk about Hatrack being "like" a conversation.

The fact is, that's all it is--"like" a conversation. It is not, exactly a conversation.

It has some of the characteristics of a conversation, but a bunch of other stuff thrown in that is unique to the forum.

In a real conversation, you ask somebody a question, they reply. If they don't reply, you've probably ticked them off and they've left.

Here, somebody might not reply to you because they were miffed, but it also might be because they had to go to work or they got caught up in other threads and forgot about that one, or they just never looked at that thread again because they'd already made their point--situations that are unique to an internet fourm.

Similarly, we have less ability to put inflection in our words--I can make a jibe sound kinder in person than I can in writing.

We have technical issues--forums go down, servers get destroyed, glitches "break" the forum--lots of things that are unique to this type of conversation.

We can also say things in ways we can't say things in real conversations. We can link to pictues or articles. We can pick exact words out of conversations.

And, one of the unique ways we have to communicate is that we can delete threads.

There are lots of things that this can say. It can say, "I regret that I said this." It can say, "There's something here I consider unacceptable." It can even say, "I'm taking my ball and going home."

But it's part of the forum, and part of the experience. As much a part of the experience as forum outages or dobies.

That's not to say it's not without repercussion. Just like in any conversation, you have to accept repsonsibility for what happens as a result of what you communicate, no matter what the means of communication. If your deletion was a slap, you have to deal with the consequences of slapping someone. But if your deletion was an attempt to protect someone, you have to accept some people aren't going to like it. You can post a mayfly or something explaining your actions and see if the community understands.

But ultimately, you do what you think is right.

Seriously, we've got to remember, everything that's happened here is transitory.

There were great posts I made on the Fresco website in the Big Mouth Lion days. They're gone now.

There were threads posted on Compuserve waaaay back in the day that I participated in. I would have no idea how to go about finding those now.

I fully expect that one day, by design or by malware, everything here on Hatrack will go to that great hard drive in the sky.

Ultimately, those bits of data dissapearing won't matter nearly so much as the effect those bits of data had when they formed words and reached the eyes, hearts, and minds of the people of the Forum when they were here.

Hatrack is unique. Everything about it is part of the experience.

I realize that there are lots of reasons for being upset about a thread being deleted. There are threads I will be sorry to see go.

But if you're opposed to thread deletion because you believe in the sanctity of the words, remember--the day will come when those will be gone. It's happened before. It will happen again.

So it goes.

In the meantime, relish the conversation as it's happening. Hatrack isn't just unique in its means of communication. It's also unique in its passion, its community, its commitment.

Don't lose sight of what's really behind that. Our commitment shouldn't really be so much about about our words, as it should be about our commitment to each other.

Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert Hugo
Member
Member # 3980

 - posted      Profile for Javert Hugo   Email Javert Hugo         Edit/Delete Post 
Squick, you're equating "we reserve the right to delete" with "we will delete."

You are wrong to do so. They are not identical in meaning.

Posts: 1753 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Squick, you're equating "we reserve the right to delete" with "we will delete."
Errr...no I'm not. I don't even understand this accusation.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
But if you're opposed to thread deletion because you believe in the sanctity of the words
Who in this thread or any other has anyone said anything like this?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
docmagik
Member
Member # 1131

 - posted      Profile for docmagik   Email docmagik         Edit/Delete Post 
As for the "Editing" Vs "Deleting" arguement, I'll go back to the post I made about my wife's spending.

Every post in the thread made refrence to what I'd said. There were posts in there accusing me of "snooping" on her when I'd gone into the account to check that my direct deposit had gone in, posts about all kinds of stuff related to what I'd said.

Just editing my post may have made things worse if my wife had found it, because the other posts may have made her imagination run wild with what wording I may have used when describing her, how detailed I got with information, and so on.

I realize that some of you feel that's too bad--that it was a mistake I made to post it, and that once others have said something about it I have to respect their right to have their words preserved.

I respect your right to that opinion.

I also submit that there are relationships to me that are more important than others, and that if we were friends in meatspace, there would probably be times I'd have to put my wife and my relationship above our relationship as well. I hope you can understand that, and know that I'd expect you to do the same for those closest to you.

I wouldn't do it without regret, just like if I had to break off a business arrangement we had because of a financial crisis due to family illness. I'd know the situation wasn't ideal, but it would be the best--and most moral--decision I could make at the time.

Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
doc,
You know, what you could have done in that instance would be to send a message to PJ saying "I really regret posting this thread. I don't want my wife finding it and being hurt by it. Could you delete it? Thanks" and it would have been deleted.

Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert Hugo
Member
Member # 3980

 - posted      Profile for Javert Hugo   Email Javert Hugo         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
You know, what you could have done in that instance would be to send a message to PJ saying "I really regret posting this thread. I don't want my wife finding it and being hurt by it. Could you delete it? Thanks" and it would have been deleted.
You're guessing on that last part. You don't know that.
Posts: 1753 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
Wow, you really, really don't trust PJ, do you? Of course it would have been deleted. I'm pretty sure I don't know him half as well as you and I'm sure he would have deleted it.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert Hugo
Member
Member # 3980

 - posted      Profile for Javert Hugo   Email Javert Hugo         Edit/Delete Post 
Oh, baloney. I just respect him enough to not wish him to stay glued to his computer all day in order to hold my hand.

As a side note, I wonder if this is fundamental difference in a view of authority?

I prefer more freedom and less safety.

Posts: 1753 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
twinky
Member
Member # 693

 - posted      Profile for twinky   Email twinky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by MrSquicky:
quote:
It doesn't say in there that those are the criteria for thread or post deletion, though I can see how one might think that's implied.
Forget implied. It is established (in the part I included in the edit) that they reserve the right to delete any posts for no reason whatsoever, let alone egregious violations of the terms explicitly laid out in the TOS.
They can delete posts for any or no reason. This does not mean that the criteria laid out for what members shouldn't post are the criteria by which posts and threads will be deleted. That's an implication you've drawn from it.

Often, Pop will warn a poster or posters in public or privately without actually editing or deleting their posts or threads, even in cases that violate the critera laid out for what members shouldn't post. This suggests that those criteria are not the same as the ones Pop uses to decide when to edit or delete a post or thread, but rather that deletions comprise a subset of the things members shouldn't post -- presumably the most egregious subset.

quote:
Originally posted by docmagik:
I realize that some of you feel that's too bad--that it was a mistake I made to post it, and that once others have said something about it I have to respect their right to have their words preserved.

You're still mischaracterizing my postition, though I can't speak for others. You could have posted in the thread asking people to edit or remove their comments, or, since the ability to delete threads is available, asked if anyone would strenuously object to your deleting it, or even warn people that you planned to delete it.

You may have done some of those things, of course; the thread is gone and I didn't participate. I'm simply pointing out that removal of the ability to delete threads you start doesn't leave you with no recourse.

Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
I don't know. I like the freedom of expressing myself without having to worry about someone deleting what I wrote.

You seem to like the safety of being able to delete other people's words.

---

I have a very distrustful view of authority in general. In this specific case, I'm pretty sure PJ does his best and tries to make fair decisions, so while I don't always agree with him, I trust him with moderator power. I think he is much more trustworthy with moderator power and with the ability to wipe out my writing and effort than a random Hatracker.

You, on the other hand, seem to desire the power of being a moderator.

Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert Hugo
Member
Member # 3980

 - posted      Profile for Javert Hugo   Email Javert Hugo         Edit/Delete Post 
That's it, you know. I'm mad for power! Mad!

I don't see this conversation coming to any conclusion and I'm bored, so you'll have to stay thinking that.

Posts: 1753 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
This does not mean that the criteria laid out for what members shouldn't post are the criteria by which posts and threads will be deleted. That's an implication you've drawn from it.
I didn't draw this implication.

You said that he might feel constrained by the TOS. I demonstrated that no constraints exist in the terms of the user agreement.

I was by no means trying to show what criteria they definitely use, only that they are free to use the criteria that you said they might not be.

Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Oh, baloney. I just respect him enough to not wish him to stay glued to his computer all day in order to hold my hand.
That has absolutely nothing to do with what you said, which is that I was just guessing that PJ would delete the thread in question if asked that way. You apparently don't believe that he obviously would.

Whether or not he's glued to the screen has nothing to do with that.

Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jon Boy
Member
Member # 4284

 - posted      Profile for Jon Boy           Edit/Delete Post 
No, she doesn't know that he would. You leapt from her saying that to accusing her of not trusting Papa Janitor, which is indeed baloney.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pooka
Member
Member # 5003

 - posted      Profile for pooka   Email pooka         Edit/Delete Post 
Why don't you two just admit the truth? That you're in love with each other!
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
errr...no, she said I was "just guessing" that he would, which, to me, is absurd. I have well-nigh 100% confidence that he would. kat apparently does not. She seems to believe that I don't have reason to do more than "just guess" that this is true. On something like this, that, to me, would constitute not trusting him to moderate things properly.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MightyCow
Member
Member # 9253

 - posted      Profile for MightyCow           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Javert Hugo:
I don't see this conversation coming to any conclusion and I'm bored, so you'll have to stay thinking that.

This is a much more elegant solution than deleting the entire thread.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
twinky
Member
Member # 693

 - posted      Profile for twinky   Email twinky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by MrSquicky:
I didn't draw this implication.

You said that he might feel constrained by the TOS. I demonstrated that no constraints exist in the terms of the user agreement.

I was by no means trying to show what criteria they definitely use, only that they are free to use the criteria that you said they might not be.

Oh, I see. I misunderstood, sorry. [Smile]
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
This is a much more elegant solution than deleting the entire thread.
I've had experiences with kat where she's done that or deleted the post that turned out to be wrong. I make sure to quote her now so that she doesn't really have that option.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert Hugo
Member
Member # 3980

 - posted      Profile for Javert Hugo   Email Javert Hugo         Edit/Delete Post 
Let it go, Squick. You'll be much happier when you stop carrying a grudge.
Posts: 1753 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ela
Member
Member # 1365

 - posted      Profile for Ela           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Kwea:
I don't think Dags has any hidden motive for wanting to do this. His motive are as he has stated them from the beginning. But I disagree with his opinion of how divisive this topic/thread has the potential to be.

Regardless of his intention for this thread, I can see a time where it is referenced in a non-constructive manner in the near future.I believe it is almost inevitable that it will be used as ammo in flame wars and character assignation attempts.

It could get real ugly, despite any good intentions.


So I don't support this thread, despite the fact that I have never deleted a non-mayfly thread myself. The risks outweigh the gain, IMO.


I already know who I don't trust. For the most part this thread won't change that.

These are some of the reasons I don't support this thread, also. I do believe that Dag started it with the best of intentions. I also believe that the consequences will be different then he thinks.
Posts: 5771 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ela
Member
Member # 1365

 - posted      Profile for Ela           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
You know what I'd support? Adding three fields to the user profile database, tracking the number of times someone edited a post, the number of times someone deleted a post, and the number of times someone deleted a thread.

I don't like that idea. It wouldn't differentiate between a deleted mayfly and other deletions. It also wouldn't give you any information as to why a thread was edited - to avoid hurt feelings? spelling error? to acknowledge the post of someone who was typing at the same time as you?

I think it could lead to the same type of ostracism as I fear this thread could lead to.

Posts: 5771 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 9 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2