Blissy Silk Pillowcase [Fact Or...
Home & Garden0 min ago
is it time for ED to stop being so lackadaisical (sp)?
27 Answers
aliases are running riot and provoking discord.
the marlboro men are making every other question vanish off the page?
threads and posts are being vanished for no good reason.
is it time for a change at the top?
the marlboro men are making every other question vanish off the page?
threads and posts are being vanished for no good reason.
is it time for a change at the top?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by steviep165. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
an editor who banned questions from a question site would hardly be doing her job. She's said on another thread what's being done, including emails to offenders (presumably telling them what the Search this site facility is for).
I don't know what can be done about aliases - though it appears to me a lot of it is mass hysteria caused when a bunch of people convince themselves, without any proof, that two users are the same person.
I don't know what can be done about aliases - though it appears to me a lot of it is mass hysteria caused when a bunch of people convince themselves, without any proof, that two users are the same person.
I do agree steviep165, but Ed's recent deletion of views critical of her position on this matter concerns me far more than the Marlboro quiz fiasco.
She allows people to be as offensive as they like against Moslems on the News section, which can be seen as admirable or controversial depending on your viewpoint, but then censors people who disagree with her policy on the Marlboro matter.
Are we not allowed to criticise the way some Americans are using/abusing this site, including the present Editor?
She allows people to be as offensive as they like against Moslems on the News section, which can be seen as admirable or controversial depending on your viewpoint, but then censors people who disagree with her policy on the Marlboro matter.
Are we not allowed to criticise the way some Americans are using/abusing this site, including the present Editor?
I'm sorry, but its just a quiz, and a quick use of the "all unanswered" shows that the majority of those are from the marlboro quiz and random 'thank yous' - not other puzzle questions that have been moved from the top of the list.
Aliases running wild? As always, please report posts you find offensive.
And yes, cussing the editor is not allowed. Doing so will pretty much guarantee your post getting removed. If you would like to offer a complaint, please drop us an email through the Contact Us page.
Aliases running wild? As always, please report posts you find offensive.
And yes, cussing the editor is not allowed. Doing so will pretty much guarantee your post getting removed. If you would like to offer a complaint, please drop us an email through the Contact Us page.
Jno, I DID NOT cuss the ED, OK? I expressed an opinion about the site and her capacity within in which she didn't like, that is completely different.
I don't care about my first post on the subject being banned too much because I did forget we were in Toytown and use a mispelt naughty word, I do however object in the extreme to having my second post banned as that was a rational and sensibly put response to the lets say "interesting" in the hope that this post might hold, response of the Ed's to the whining about ABer's lack of manners.
I don't know which sites you post on besides this Jno, but on sensible adult forums, it is perfectly acceptable to question editorial decisions if they are impacting negatively on the site, it's not Nursery School you know, people who use this site are entitled to post within the rules without risking having their posts removed because the Ed feels got at.Have you ever encountered an Editor that isn't got at?
Critisism goes with the territory and I did not swear, was not abusive or unpleasant in my second post and the people whose posts were removed who simply agreed with me certainly weren't.
The Ed has gone down in my opinion since it became obvious that she'll remove posts that are critical of her methods even if they are fairly worded, but that's her cross to bear quite frankly, as I don't suppose she cares what I think of her and I don't really care what she thinks of me
either.
I do think the site is shambolic, unevenly run,and the Ed is better equipped than anyone to see the very good posters that she's lost who won't come on here anymore, but aside from complaining to Crystal Guides direct which is a step too mean for me to be honest, there's nothing you can do until either she moves on of her own accord or they move her on, because she's sure as anything not interested in our opinions.
I don't care about my first post on the subject being banned too much because I did forget we were in Toytown and use a mispelt naughty word, I do however object in the extreme to having my second post banned as that was a rational and sensibly put response to the lets say "interesting" in the hope that this post might hold, response of the Ed's to the whining about ABer's lack of manners.
I don't know which sites you post on besides this Jno, but on sensible adult forums, it is perfectly acceptable to question editorial decisions if they are impacting negatively on the site, it's not Nursery School you know, people who use this site are entitled to post within the rules without risking having their posts removed because the Ed feels got at.Have you ever encountered an Editor that isn't got at?
Critisism goes with the territory and I did not swear, was not abusive or unpleasant in my second post and the people whose posts were removed who simply agreed with me certainly weren't.
The Ed has gone down in my opinion since it became obvious that she'll remove posts that are critical of her methods even if they are fairly worded, but that's her cross to bear quite frankly, as I don't suppose she cares what I think of her and I don't really care what she thinks of me
either.
I do think the site is shambolic, unevenly run,and the Ed is better equipped than anyone to see the very good posters that she's lost who won't come on here anymore, but aside from complaining to Crystal Guides direct which is a step too mean for me to be honest, there's nothing you can do until either she moves on of her own accord or they move her on, because she's sure as anything not interested in our opinions.
I agree with you 100% noxlumos and it is sad that one cannot disagree with the AB Ed or other posters without running the risk of those posts being deleted or being banned from the site.
There is one thing that is very badly amiss with the site, however, and I am surprised those that run the site have not picked this up. When you originally post a question, you are given ten or so threads which are old answers that might contain the answer you are looking for and make your question superfluous. BUT, nowhere does it say that even if you do not find an answer within those threads that might contain your answer, you should also search the site just to confirm your question has not been asked before. If there was something posted to this effect then I am pretty sure that the Marlboro fiasco would never have materialised.
For interests sake, I took one of the Marlboro questions that I knew had been asked before and rewrote it exactly the same as the questioner. In the ten or so posts that came up there was absolutely no hint that the question had been asked before and it was therefore no wonder that the questioner had gone on to post the question. If the marlboro questions have done one thing it is surely that the site needs to inform posters of a new rule that you have to search the site to see if your question has been asked before and not just be given ten or so questions to look through that are often irrelevant to the question being put.
There is one thing that is very badly amiss with the site, however, and I am surprised those that run the site have not picked this up. When you originally post a question, you are given ten or so threads which are old answers that might contain the answer you are looking for and make your question superfluous. BUT, nowhere does it say that even if you do not find an answer within those threads that might contain your answer, you should also search the site just to confirm your question has not been asked before. If there was something posted to this effect then I am pretty sure that the Marlboro fiasco would never have materialised.
For interests sake, I took one of the Marlboro questions that I knew had been asked before and rewrote it exactly the same as the questioner. In the ten or so posts that came up there was absolutely no hint that the question had been asked before and it was therefore no wonder that the questioner had gone on to post the question. If the marlboro questions have done one thing it is surely that the site needs to inform posters of a new rule that you have to search the site to see if your question has been asked before and not just be given ten or so questions to look through that are often irrelevant to the question being put.
This does seem to have gotten rather silly AB Ed.
Nox, I lost the plot even before I posted above (I a not sure that post even went into the right thread...nevermind) so I don't know what you sai dthat was so unforgiveable. Perhaps you are not a member of the ....inner circle....
I agree that repetitive posts are quite annoying to many of us, and as most of us know, using the 'contact us' email option rarely gets a response, let alone any action. I don't think that the Ed should spend her life trawling the repeated Marlboro posts, in as much as she lets the persistent 'who is the best/funniest/closest ABer' threads go by. And I am not even certain the report function has any effect these days. c'est la vie.
Nox, I lost the plot even before I posted above (I a not sure that post even went into the right thread...nevermind) so I don't know what you sai dthat was so unforgiveable. Perhaps you are not a member of the ....inner circle....
I agree that repetitive posts are quite annoying to many of us, and as most of us know, using the 'contact us' email option rarely gets a response, let alone any action. I don't think that the Ed should spend her life trawling the repeated Marlboro posts, in as much as she lets the persistent 'who is the best/funniest/closest ABer' threads go by. And I am not even certain the report function has any effect these days. c'est la vie.
Excuse me for living jno, but since when has disagreeing with someone's opinion been considered the same as cussing?
I wouldn't condone cussing, but opinions should matter on this site, even the disagreeable ones and I doubt the Ab Ed needs you defending her honour like some servile knight of the keyboard.
I wouldn't condone cussing, but opinions should matter on this site, even the disagreeable ones and I doubt the Ab Ed needs you defending her honour like some servile knight of the keyboard.
very good point, goldenfield, I hadn't realised the list of previous questions was so inadequate (I don't post a lot of Qs myself). The search engine was dramatically improved a while ago - it used to be unusably bad - but perhaps this should have been sorted out at the same time? I'm sure you're right: if Marlboro posters had been directed to previous answers, they'd have read them and gone away.
noxlumos, I hadn't seen your post or other ones that have been removed, and wasn't directing my comments at anyone in particular; I was just making a general point. The site is owned by Crystal Guides; they pay the bills, not us (we use the facility entirely free), and in return get revenue from the rather small number of ads. They hire an editor to run the site, which she does. Their house, their rules.
This isn't primarily a 'forum' in the usual internet sense, but a Q&A site, and though a certain amount of chat is permitted, I can't honestly see that the numerous posts disagreeing with the way she does her job contribute anything to this prime function. There are, as you say, plenty of other sites on which people can complain to their heart's content about editors. Maybe a lot of AB users have left because they are unable to do the same here... but actually, I doubt this is really true.
noxlumos, I hadn't seen your post or other ones that have been removed, and wasn't directing my comments at anyone in particular; I was just making a general point. The site is owned by Crystal Guides; they pay the bills, not us (we use the facility entirely free), and in return get revenue from the rather small number of ads. They hire an editor to run the site, which she does. Their house, their rules.
This isn't primarily a 'forum' in the usual internet sense, but a Q&A site, and though a certain amount of chat is permitted, I can't honestly see that the numerous posts disagreeing with the way she does her job contribute anything to this prime function. There are, as you say, plenty of other sites on which people can complain to their heart's content about editors. Maybe a lot of AB users have left because they are unable to do the same here... but actually, I doubt this is really true.
Jno, the response I posted was in answer to the editorial comment on the thread regarding the Marlboro questions and in it I actually highlighted the fact that I am aware I don't own the site, but it WAS a legitimate reply to something that the Ed had said and I do NOT post, by and large, multiple critisisms of the Ed or her job. The remarks were in context and completly appropriate. I suggest you have a good think about the amount of people who no longer post Jno because I can think of scores of them, maybe we should have a RIP thread for all the loved and lost Abers to jog your memory, but then again I daresay it'd be deleted as it would prove a point.
-- answer removed --
I know lots of people have left, noxlumos - quick turnover is common enough on websites, and as I said, this isn't a forum for regular discussion in the usual sense - but I don't know why, except in a few cases where they've explained their grievances. In none of these, as I remember, was 'my posts criticising editorial policy have been deleted' the reason given. Mostly, I think people just leave because they've said what they had to say, got the answers they wanted, or just got a life. (Erm, not me, obviously.)
Latest Posts
ChatterBank0 min ago
News3 mins ago
Film, Media & TV5 mins ago
Twitching & Birdwatching5 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles14 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.