Quizzes & Puzzles14 mins ago
Moderators
93 Answers
Why should Moderators who are debating in opposition, be allowed the power to remove posts, surely they should be seen to be either impartial or not given the power to remove?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. 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.
I'd love to know where all of these 'removed' posts are occurring because
(a) it's certainly not me that's been removing them ; and
(b) I don't see vast numbers of gaps where posts have been deleted.
Apart from some 'routine tidying up' (e.g. removing a question which was posted in the wrong category, where the questioner has already re-posted it correctly anyway), I struggle to remember when I last deleted an individual post. There have been a few occasions recently where I've removed entire threads for legal reasons (i.e. because of the 'sub judice' rules) but I, for one, simply don't go around zapping anything that I happen to disagree with and I've seen no evidence of anyone else doing it either!
(a) it's certainly not me that's been removing them ; and
(b) I don't see vast numbers of gaps where posts have been deleted.
Apart from some 'routine tidying up' (e.g. removing a question which was posted in the wrong category, where the questioner has already re-posted it correctly anyway), I struggle to remember when I last deleted an individual post. There have been a few occasions recently where I've removed entire threads for legal reasons (i.e. because of the 'sub judice' rules) but I, for one, simply don't go around zapping anything that I happen to disagree with and I've seen no evidence of anyone else doing it either!
I am lead to understand that the AB EDs have lives outwith this site (hard to believe though that may be) and he delegates his powers to those he can trust and also to B00.
If anyone thinks they can do a better job, I am sure the Ab Editor would welcome applications
If anyone thinks they can do a better job, I am sure the Ab Editor would welcome applications
Rubbish.
The posts and threads that were removed from news were not because the moderator disagreed with the opinons. It was because the opinions broke the Site Rules. I did not remove any of the threads, but which ever moderator did, was acting correctly.
Moderators are not appointed for their neutrality but for their fairness.
The posts and threads that were removed from news were not because the moderator disagreed with the opinons. It was because the opinions broke the Site Rules. I did not remove any of the threads, but which ever moderator did, was acting correctly.
Moderators are not appointed for their neutrality but for their fairness.
The 'clusters' that you refer to, Agchristie, probably come about simply through some 'tidying up' by a moderator.
On the few occasions that I've deleted an individual post there have often been a string of comments about that post immediately after it. Deleting the original post alone would leave loads of posts which would simply baffle people joining the thread, so it's best to remove the lot.
For example, an intoxicated member might post a string of 4-letter words. The next half a dozen posts simply say 'Reported', 'Disgusting', etc but they'll all become meaningless when the original offending post is zapped, so the whole lot need to disappear if the thread is to retain any integrity.
On the few occasions that I've deleted an individual post there have often been a string of comments about that post immediately after it. Deleting the original post alone would leave loads of posts which would simply baffle people joining the thread, so it's best to remove the lot.
For example, an intoxicated member might post a string of 4-letter words. The next half a dozen posts simply say 'Reported', 'Disgusting', etc but they'll all become meaningless when the original offending post is zapped, so the whole lot need to disappear if the thread is to retain any integrity.
