So What Gets Deleted?

And Who Decides?

1 to 20 of 246 messages
28/11/2009 at 23:17

I was a bit disappointed to find that the recent dehydrator thread has been deleted.

I thought I'd dreamed it until I found it via the search function.

So Beth was a bit sweary - big deal.  The rest of the thread was a reasonable discussion and I  am a bit miffed that my carefully crafted comments have been deleted from history.

If you're out there, Big Brother, what are your criteria for deciding who becomes an 'unperson' and whose comments are deleted from history?

Best Regards

Winston Smith    

28/11/2009 at 23:23

Was it really deleted? fucking hell!

28/11/2009 at 23:24
jesus fecking christ!!!!!!!!!!! she really did take her ball home. i dont believe it!
28/11/2009 at 23:25
I cant read it Ray, can you paste the post on here?
Edited: 28/11/2009 at 23:26
28/11/2009 at 23:34

We have to stand up these censorious bastards now!

Who's with me, brothers (and sisters)...

28/11/2009 at 23:35
have not got it fb but i do have a recent post from a couple of weeks back when peeps were on langdale meet.
28/11/2009 at 23:41
Ray !!!!! wrote (see)
have not got it fb but i do have a recent post from a couple of weeks back when peeps were on langdale meet.

Eh? what happened at Langdale?
28/11/2009 at 23:46
dont know as i didnt go. it was what happened here but my lips are sealed.it was nasty though.
28/11/2009 at 23:49

OH

Anyway back on topic, I think Jake is looking for a degree of transparency and consistency in moderation - Is that right Jake or did I miss the point?

28/11/2009 at 23:53
Fossil Bluff wrote (see)

OH

Anyway back on topic, I think Jake is looking for a degree of transparency and consistency in moderation - Is that right Jake or did I miss the point?

Yup Bloof.  You should take as a guideline that the Langdale incident should have been deleted.  Does that make everything clear?

28/11/2009 at 23:57
Frum wrote (see)

Yup Bloof.  You should take as a guideline that the Langdale incident should have been deleted.  Does that make everything clear?


Nope
28/11/2009 at 23:59
Fossil Bluff wrote (see)

OH

Anyway back on topic, I think Jake is looking for a degree of transparency and consistency in moderation - Is that right Jake or did I miss the point?


You did indeed get the point my friend.

Why is it OK for people to swear on the Windy thread and not on others?

I could understand the Mods deleting the Windy thread on the grounds of not boring the rest of us to death with their witless drivel but that's a whole other conversation...   

29/11/2009 at 00:01

Langdale incident?

now I'm very curious! ...is someone going to pm or email me the details

...please?

29/11/2009 at 00:05

I can tell you all about Langdale Glyn as unlike these sorry tossers I was actually there..

It rained, a lot

We drank beer, a lot

I enjoyed it, a lot ....apart from the rainy bits......ah 

29/11/2009 at 00:06
Jake wrote (see)


You did indeed get the point my friend.

Why is it OK for people to swear on the Windy thread and not on others?

I could understand the Mods deleting the Windy thread on the grounds of not boring the rest of us to death with their witless drivel but that's a whole other conversation...   


I couldnt agree more.

The threads are not independant little islands divorced from the rest of the world, nor are they private to some people and not others. I would imagine the vast majority of views on this forum come from non members getting google hits.

So why is it acceptable for someone to say 'Fuck' on windy - and yet it will be deleted from here as soon as a brown noser reports it?

Interesting isnt it

Edited: 29/11/2009 at 00:11
29/11/2009 at 00:30

I think Jon does a good job of moderating this forum. Basically, letting us get on with it like adults and self moderate until someone has a fair grievance and complains.

I don't know why the thread mentioned in the OP was pulled, it contained worth while stuff. I was following it from the beginning and cannot see any reason... even if people did get a bit sweary. It's a Saturday, Jon normally has better things to do and a bit of sweary rant normally goes un-checked, or just that post will be modified. So I'm guessing that the original poster of that thread asked Jon to pull it.

29/11/2009 at 08:02
Rocky wrote (see)

 So I'm guessing that the original poster of that thread asked Jon to pull it.


That's about the gist of it, yes.

OutdoorsMagic Editor | jon@outdoorsmagic.com 

29/11/2009 at 09:06
Jake wrote (see)
Fossil Bluff wrote (see)

OH

Anyway back on topic, I think Jake is looking for a degree of transparency and consistency in moderation - Is that right Jake or did I miss the point?


You did indeed get the point my friend.

Why is it OK for people to swear on the Windy thread and not on others?

I could understand the Mods deleting the Windy thread on the grounds of not boring the rest of us to death with their witless drivel but that's a whole other conversation...   


If you don't like it don't go there, it's not hard.
29/11/2009 at 09:17

Folks would do well to realise that there are real people behind the forum personas.

Some things aren't funny, and are not for an uninvited audience. It's maybe easy to forget that this place isn't a pub with a few mates sitting around the bar; anyone with an internet connection can read what's posted here.

Jake: We may well spout witless drivel, but on the whole we at least have some sense of propriety.

29/11/2009 at 09:37
Jake wrote (see)
Why is it OK for people to swear on the Windy thread and not on others?

I could understand the Mods deleting the Windy thread on the grounds of not boring the rest of us to death with their witless drivel but that's a whole other conversation...   

Jake, to help us evaluate your criticism please say whether you :

a. Visited Windy once, saw what it was like and thereafter kept away.

b. Are a regular, long term lurker (aka peeping Tom) there.

1 to 20 of 246 messages
Forum Jump  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter

Competitions

Sign up to our twitter feed

Promotions