Just close it next time. To serve as a warning for the anti-thinking crowd that their shit ain’t gonna fly here.
I don’t know what thread you’re referring to.
But I don’t disagree with your suggestion.
Me, neither. As far as I know, the mods haven’t deleted any threads.
What thread is being referenced?
And which “anti-thinking crowd” are you talking about?
Abstract posts w/o proper references makes it difficult to respond appropriately.
But I agree with Serena, that some threads are better served by being locked rather than deleted outright.
1 Like
I don’t see the one about election fraud started by the guy everyone immediately accused of being a troll.
Maybe he deleted it himself given the reaction and he shared personal information.
That seems very likely.
If this is what DTNF is referring to, then I would suggest that a refutation of the article posted be done first before any auto-locking is done.
If there was an established precedence–and general agreement by T-4* posters–that the source is generally pushing poor information, then an auto-lock might make sense.
But to call someone a troll solely based on a single post/thread is disingenuous and that start of the creation of an echo-chamber. If there is a concern that a new-poster is a reincarnation of a “known troll,” report the post/poster.
And if there is a concern that a post is spreading mis-information, REPORT IT. Nothing positive is gained by whining and complaining and throwing around names. Responding with correct information is also an appropriate response.
*T-4 is my proposed “short-hand” for the group of posters at Trust Level 4 including the moderators.
Part of the problem in this thread is that since the thread was deleted, some posters don’t know to what I’m referring.
But, yeah, that’s the one.
And, yeah, it’s more likely that the poster deleted it himself.
And I don’t think that is a good option (a poster deleting a whole thread) for the forum to have.
In short, that poster deleted the truth that the others posted in refutation of his post containing innumerate links. This forum’s format enabled him to hide the truth.
1 Like
So you’re saying that those other links refuting his claims are no longer in existence?
What links? Where?
I can’t even prove that the thread even existed, except in my mind.
So . . . what exactly is the problem, then? Someone deleting your posts that you felt were brilliant?
Or something else?
I guess there is no problem, since I cannot prove the thread ever existed.
The mods didn’t discuss deleting the thread. This forum is new, and we are learning our way around, and it’s possible a mod deleted it by mistake. But I agree, it’s more likely the op deleted it himself.
Unlike vbulletin, where mods could usually see deleted content, this seems to just be gone. It’s possible for the administrator to change that behavior, I think.
Anyway, dr T, your beef here is not with the moderation. At least, not with the intended moderation.
Add one to the beef with the forum format, then.
Mmm, beef…
I thought users could delete their own threads in vbulletin too?
I had to request to have a thread of mine deleted at the AO. OPs couldn’t do it themselves.
We could delete posts, but not entire threads. As a limited power mod, I could only delete threads if they were in a specific forum (but I had the ability to move threads there).
Even then, there would be a record of “deleted items” that the moderators could see (and review) to determine who deleted the item (in the case of posts, did a poster delete it or a mod).
Not sure where I stand on whether the OP can delete a thread started by the OP.
I can see situations where that’s reasonable (wanted to remain anonymous but discussion makes that less and less likely, so delete whole thread is best move)
I can see situations where that’s no reasonable (OP has history of starting outlandish claims, refutations would be made, and OP deletes thread and starts new similar one as if nothing was ever refuted)
Fair enough; I must be misremembering.