Missing post!?

[willowford]

Hi everyone,

I started a thread a while back and there was a bunch of us debating on it. It is now "missing" (according to message I get when I click on my email replies). Does anyone know what's going on with that?

Thanks.

[Cece]

it's possible a post was deleted (by the person who made it) and that is sending you to the error page.

[willowford]

it's possible a post was deleted (by the person who made it) and that is sending you to the error page.

I was the one that made the original thread (and didn't delete it) :S

[Cece]

click on 'profile' under your post and then 'see all posts by willowford' and look back through them, you might be able to find it that way.

[willowford]

click on 'profile' under your post and then 'see all posts by willowford' and look back through them, you might be able to find it that way.

Just tried that too. It's not there at all :S

[jimmylegs]

if a thread devolves into repeated rules contraventions, including personal attacks, the topic will be deleted. unfortunately we have a few users who like to push it. constantly.

[NHE]

That's called "moderating" in these parts. If the moderators don't like something you say or the direction a thread is going, they delete it with no prior or subsequent notice.

The initial reason thisisms became popular was the "hands off" moderating style, but that's long gone.

I don't believe that was ever the case. Please review the Rules of the Board thread and the dates of Arron's posts to that thread. Many of them date back to 2004. I don't think "hands off" was ever the approach used here.


NHE

[willowford]

if a thread devolves into repeated rules contraventions, including personal attacks, the topic will be deleted. unfortunately we have a few users who like to push it. constantly.

Can you please explain? Perhaps in a PM, why the thread in question was deleted. I am already familiar with the rules you posted. I am not familiar with which aspect of the conversation you found offensive.

Yes, I was certainly suggesting more work is needed in CCSVI - and yes, some people asked if I was a paid lobbyist to which I clearly responded.

Others posted a few websites promoting CCSVI, which I think is more than acceptable here.

I only ever commented on the contents of various replies and never at the individuals themselves, considering I don't know the individuals!

Even if others disagree with the view that we need research on CCSVI (can't believe this is such an outrageous claim here), I never a single time attacked them for their personal views and choices - in fact, I was promoting choice and continued participation in whatever research anyone would like to join in!

I am unclear as to which aspect of the thread was offensive enough to warrant censorship. Can someone please explain?

[Lyon]

I don't believe that was ever the case. Please review the Rules of the Board thread and the dates of Arron's posts to that thread. Many of them date back to 2004. I don't think "hands off" was ever the approach used here.
NHE

You've been a member here longer than I have. You know EXACTLY what I'm talking about.

Yes, I'm aware of the posts by Arron you're talking about and yes there have been rules of the board almost from day one but you and I are also aware that up till a year or so ago the rules were intentionally enforced as lightly as possible and there have been MANY user comments on that very fact over the years and that's what brought people to thisisms.

I am asking this respectfully and hopefully you'll answer, has there been a push by Arron for you and jimmy to really crack down because thisisms has really become a police state in the last couple of years....seriously.
.

[jimmylegs]

willow the topic was fine, it was the way a small vocal percentage of the membership take every topic, polarize the debate and then start abusing/provoking/wilfully misunderstanding each other, rather than maintaining the civil debate that is the core of TIMS.

[willowford]

willow the topic was fine, it was the way a small vocal percentage of the membership take every topic, polarize the debate and then start abusing/provoking/wilfully misunderstanding each other, rather than maintaining the civil debate that is the core of TIMS.

Jimmylegs,
Ok, a little clearer. But why weren't those comments deleted so at least we know what you folks consider "abuse...etc." This way, we don't even know which comment(s) were the source of the problem and you'll have to keep deleting threads cause no one ever learns what not to do.

Don't want to risk getting this thread deleted too, but isn't it a little extreme to delete an entire thread just bc u didn't fancy one or a few of the comments?

[jimmylegs]

normally i do only take out offending posts or edit the offensive sections of posts. it's a lot more work but it *is* the norm.
just so you are aware too: as volunteers, the mods do not review everything posted; offensive content is generally flagged to us by PM unless we happen to spot it by chance.

[willowford]

normally i do only take out offending posts or edit the offensive sections of posts. it's a lot more work but it *is* the norm.
just so you are aware too: as volunteers, the mods do not review everything posted; offensive content is generally flagged to us by PM unless we happen to spot it by chance.

I am taking a lot of time (when I should really be doing other things) to write and respond to posts - because I believe in the discussions. If writing something besides what the "majority" want to see, or writing views that are from a different perspective than what others are used to is going to cause offense to people, I will certainly stop my involvement here because I have no interest in offending people or getting my views censored. It's not pleasant to spend so much time writing a post - only to have it deleted for unclear reasons.

So not knowing exactly or roughly what you (or whoever) took offense to is unsettling for me. Should I just stop posting? Please advise.

[Brainteaser]

I didn't see anything offensive on the willowford thread. Much of what was said, was thought-provoking and arguable, but the counter-argument had some distance to go. I think we should encourage professionals to come to this site, but unreasonable censorship won't help.

[Lyon]

just so you are aware too: as volunteers, the mods do not review everything posted; offensive content is generally flagged to us by PM unless we happen to spot it by chance.

With that in mind things make a little more sense. During the tail end of that thread HappyPoet mentioned to Willowford that both my posts and her posts would soon be deleted and as it turns out she was right.

Soon after she PM'd me with what I thought was a serious question on her part

From: HappyPoet
To: Lyon
Posted: Tue May 03, 2011 10:36 pm
Subject: An important question!
What happened to willow's thread???

and not knowing that she was responsible and gloating I responded that it seems the thread was deleted, which prompted her response

From: HappyPoet
To: Lyon
Posted: Tue May 03, 2011 11:12 pm
Subject: I did NOT read your PM - check your Outbox

Well, at least HappyPoet got a good laugh out of it.

Looking back it's starting to seem that HappyPoet is quite often part of the "in" crowd, knowing things before the rest of us.....

From: HappyPoet
To: Lyon
Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:01 am
Subject: Malden has been...
BANNED.
All traces of him are GONE.
Thought you might want to know.