Remove ads

Introducing the LemonFools Personal Finance Calculators

Deletion of posts

Raise issues with Admin (Stooz, Clariman, Redsturgeon) e.g. alert to something important on the site or ask Admin about a moderation decision. You will be answered, but there is no response time guarantee.
spigot
Lemon Pip
Posts: 75
Joined: February 8th, 2017, 7:49 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Deletion of posts

#209229

Postby spigot » March 21st, 2019, 8:45 pm

Below is a self explanatory message from moderator Gryffron

Re brexit all over

Sent: March 21st, 2019, 10:37 am
From: gryffron
Recipient: spigot 
Hi spigot,
I have deleted your post from this thread. Cynical "thanks" don't help any discussion. And any points on moderation should be raised in room 101.

Gryffron as moderator

***********************************************************************

Hi Gryffron

I deeply resent the insulting allegation that when I thanked Itsallaguess and moderator csearle I was being ‘cynical’ and by implication my gratitude was not genuine.

Itsallaguess must have spent a fair amount of time composing a long post giving guidance on how to correctly format posts. Itsallaguess had no obligation to do this for my benefit and it would be inconsiderate and rude not to acknowledge this.

Moderator csearle deleted two posts for being ‘incomprehensible’. The first was in draft form and inadvertently submitted. With the second I had thought I had got the formatting right and therefore disappointed it had been deleted. With a post deleted it is difficult to remember it exactly and therefore whether any criticism is justified.

I asked csearle to re-post the offending post which he duly did. The formatting was incorrect giving rise to some ambiguity. I must admit I thought the punishment of deletion was somewhat disproportionate to the crime.

Moderator csearle re-posted at my request at the scene of the crime where I and anyone else who may be interested can see, and make their own mind up.

Moderator csearle had the moral courage to put his decision on show. I thanked csearle for granting my request.

As I said, I deeply resent the allegation and assure you my thanks to both Itsallaguess and csearle were genuine.
However I cannot remember my exact wording so I ask of you what I asked of csearle.
Please repost so that I and others can see if there is justification for the allegation.
If my choice of words was such that I gave the impression I was insincere I will have to eat humble pie.

spigot

PinkDalek
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3583
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
Has thanked: 808 times
Been thanked: 883 times

Re: Deletion of posts

#209232

Postby PinkDalek » March 21st, 2019, 8:57 pm

See Welcome to Room 101 viewtopic.php?f=91&t=13513.

From that "If you are unhappy with a moderation decision, have asked the moderator for clarification, and you still feel strongly enough to raise it again - then this is the place to do it.".

The idea is to ask the Moderator concerned by PM, rather than on this board, as per viewtopic.php?f=21&t=13514.

From that "If you are unhappy with or don’t understand an individual moderation decision, you can request a clarification or explanation from a Moderator by Private Message. Moderators do not have to explain their actions, but we anticipate that they will reply to polite requests, if and when they have time. Impolite messages will be ignored.".

spigot
Lemon Pip
Posts: 75
Joined: February 8th, 2017, 7:49 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Deletion of posts

#209252

Postby spigot » March 21st, 2019, 10:32 pm

PinkDalek wrote:See Welcome to Room 101 viewtopic.php?f=91&t=13513.

The idea is to ask the Moderator concerned by PM, rather than on this board, as per viewtopic.php?f=21&t=13514.


I'm only doing what I've been told.

gryffron wrote:
Moderator Message:
I have deleted a post by spigot discussing moderation, and numerous others that quoted it. So if you are wondering where your replies went, that's it. I didn't message you all.

I would remind you all that any discussion of moderation is permitted only in Room 101.

Gryffron

PinkDalek
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3583
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
Has thanked: 808 times
Been thanked: 883 times

Re: Deletion of posts

#209259

Postby PinkDalek » March 21st, 2019, 10:59 pm

spigot wrote:
PinkDalek wrote:See Welcome to Room 101 viewtopic.php?f=91&t=13513.

The idea is to ask the Moderator concerned by PM, rather than on this board, as per viewtopic.php?f=21&t=13514.


I'm only doing what I've been told.


Yes, that was clear from your OP but it is quite possible that the volunteer Mod. concerned is not familiar with the links I've provided.

GoSeigen
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1428
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
Has thanked: 329 times
Been thanked: 326 times

Re: Deletion of posts

#209262

Postby GoSeigen » March 21st, 2019, 11:07 pm

spigot wrote:
PinkDalek wrote:See Welcome to Room 101 viewtopic.php?f=91&t=13513.

The idea is to ask the Moderator concerned by PM, rather than on this board, as per viewtopic.php?f=21&t=13514.


I'm only doing what I've been told.

gryffron wrote:
Moderator Message:
I have deleted a post by spigot discussing moderation, and numerous others that quoted it. So if you are wondering where your replies went, that's it. I didn't message you all.

I would remind you all that any discussion of moderation is permitted only in Room 101.

Gryffron


spigot,

I was a Fool who reported one of your poorly formatted posts. I was enjoying reading the thread, but found your long post with numerous seemingly random nested quotes and interspersed coloured writing practically incomprehensible. Replies suffered from the same problem as obviously no-one could be bothered to unravel what you had posted. It surely can't have escaped your notice that practically everyone on this site uses the quoting mechanism as intended by the designers of this site, without insertion of coloured text all over the place. When used correctly, any quoted conversation gets neatly nested in date order and can easily be reviewed. Therefore if you adopt your own method you are bound to come into conflict with others.

To your credit I believe you took similar criticism that other posters/mods have made on the chin, and have made an effort to follow the helpful conventions mentioned above. For example, the formatting in your post to which I am replying was textbook style.


Referring to your OP on this thread, I read your thanks earlier and agree with you that they seemed quite genuinely felt and expressed. So I can understand your frustration. Of course a Fool quickly reading your post might get the wrong end of the stick and report it, but really, the Mods should at all times assume good faith and not interpret posts as sarcastic when it is not warranted.

Equally you might also assume good faith and put the Mod's action down to tiredness, being busy or just a genuine mistake. So I think it would not hurt to call it quits on this occasion, try to become expert at TLF quoting style and see if the mods give you any more grief.


As for Room 101, I interpret the instruction as referring to public discussion of moderation being restricted to this forum. I doubt that precludes anyone from sending private messages about moderation.


GS

PinkDalek
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3583
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
Has thanked: 808 times
Been thanked: 883 times

Re: Deletion of posts

#209264

Postby PinkDalek » March 21st, 2019, 11:21 pm

GoSeigen wrote:As for Room 101, I interpret the instruction as referring to public discussion of moderation being restricted to this forum. I doubt that precludes anyone from sending private messages about moderation.


As it happens, I agree with all you've just said, save for the two sentences above. The extracts I provided suggest PM the Mod. first, come here if that is unresolved.

GoSeigen
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1428
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
Has thanked: 329 times
Been thanked: 326 times

Re: Deletion of posts

#209265

Postby GoSeigen » March 21st, 2019, 11:31 pm

PinkDalek wrote:
GoSeigen wrote:As for Room 101, I interpret the instruction as referring to public discussion of moderation being restricted to this forum. I doubt that precludes anyone from sending private messages about moderation.


As it happens, I agree with all you've just said, save for the two sentences above. The extracts I provided suggest PM the Mod. first, come here if that is unresolved.


Quite right PD, but maybe misunderstanding those two lines because when I wrote "the instruction" above I was referring specifically to Gryffron's instructions to the OP (which the spigot said he was following), not to the extracts you quoted. Sorry if I didn't make that clear enough.

Of course I agree the usual procedure is as you describe.

GS

Itsallaguess
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3186
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
Has thanked: 958 times
Been thanked: 1940 times

Re: Deletion of posts

#209274

Postby Itsallaguess » March 22nd, 2019, 4:26 am

spigot wrote:
Itsallaguess must have spent a fair amount of time composing a long post giving guidance on how to correctly format posts. Itsallaguess had no obligation to do this for my benefit and it would be inconsiderate and rude not to acknowledge this.


Hi spigot,

I don't wish to get too involved with the specific moderation issue that's being discussed on this thread, as I've not been involved at all in that process, but given that I've been name-checked in the above post then I do want to say, for the avoidance of any doubt whatsoever, that I read your earlier post thanking me for helping to explain some of the posting convention issues that you were having difficulty with, and I took it as a genuine post offering your genuine gratitude.

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Itsallaguess
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3186
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
Has thanked: 958 times
Been thanked: 1940 times

Re: Deletion of posts

#209277

Postby Itsallaguess » March 22nd, 2019, 4:57 am

spigot wrote:
Itsallaguess must have spent a fair amount of time composing a long post giving guidance on how to correctly format posts.


Hi spigot,

Having just taken a look at a couple of your recent posts elsewhere on the board, I still think that you need to spend a bit of time trying to see that where posters create new posts that might contain quoted extracts from other posters, the new block-sections of reply-text does clearly sit 'outside' of the quote-boxes, and I don't think you've quite got to grips with that yet, as you seem to still be creating your 'new-replies' inside those quote-boxes, and not outside them, as is the convention.

I think if you try to understand this specific issue, and work on trying to comply with it more consistently, then you'll come up against far fewer issues.

To help explain this, I've created a couple of test-posts on the TEST board -

https://www.lemonfool.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=16882

On the above test-thread, I've created an opening post with two distinct sections.

I've then created a reply to that opening post, but have split my reply into two separate sections, quoting each of the two earlier sections separately.

You can see how I've constructed that split-quote reply by taking a look at this snapshot, which hopefully shows two distinctly separate QUOTE/UNQUOTE bracketed areas, with my reply to each of those bracketed QUOTE areas sat underneath them -

https://i.imgur.com/v59CCil.png

When I've constructed the above post, and then submitted it, the resulting post looks like this -

https://i.imgur.com/9vSu3lr.png

Hopefully you can clearly see in the above link that my reply-text to each quote-section sits OUTSIDE of each quote-section, and is clearly written by me as the replying-author, and it's this specific issue that I think you need to address when you're both replying to posts, and specifically when you're replying to posts where you're wanting to reply to different sections of those posts, and trying to write sectional-replies underneath different sections of an earlier post....

What you seem to be doing is putting your part-replies INSIDE the quoted-area blocks, and not OUTSIDE as in the bottom link above, so hopefully this helps to explain what seems to still be a continuing issue with your sectional-replies.

Finally, I will point out that to carry out sectional-replies similar to the example created above, you do need to carry out some manual-intervention to the quoting-sections. By default, when you select the double-quotes icon to create a reply to an existing quote, the board-software by default creates a single quote-section of the whole post that you're replying to. This is great when we're simply wanting to put a single block or reply-text underneath that single-quote section, but it means that where we might be wanting to nest specific replies inside what might be a large quoted area, we need to MANUALLY CREATE the quote-breaks, and then MANUALLY CREATE the new quote-introductions for the next section, and I think it's this specific bit of the task that you're not carrying out.

Hopefully in the above final-link, you can see that it contains two distinct QUOTE/UNQUOTE sections, with my replies underneath each section, and I think if you can get to grips with the need for this manual-creation of QUOTE/UNQUOTE sections, where you are specifically wanting to create your sectional-replies to specific different areas of other peoples posts, then you'll solve a lot of the issues people are currently having due to not fully understanding this issue at the moment.

I hope this helps, but if there's still anything that's unclear, then please ask away....

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

redsturgeon
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4052
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:06 am
Has thanked: 385 times
Been thanked: 659 times

Re: Deletion of posts

#209286

Postby redsturgeon » March 22nd, 2019, 7:39 am

Hopefully the misunderstandings surrounding the issues raised here have now been covered. For the sake of clarity on all sides, some points to note.

1. This board is not meant for long discussions of moderation.

2. The quote system can cause problems if not used in the way intended and adding comments within nested quotes generally causes confusion'. Please stick to the suggestions made by itsallaguess.

3. It is often difficult to attribute motive behind words on the screen, it is probably best to take things at face value as a default position.

I will now close this discussion, feel free to PM me if there is anything outstanding that I have missed.

John

EDIT

The following is the text of the post from spigot thanking the mods.

I wish to thank Itsallaguess for the constructive criticism and guidance he gave.
Also moderator csearle for reposting my post, warts an' all, as I requested.

Thank you both
spigot

PS. I have just posted so you can judge whether your efforts have been successful.


It seems genuine to me and apologies if it was misconstrued.

John

gryffron
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1371
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:00 am
Has thanked: 75 times
Been thanked: 280 times

Re: Deletion of posts

#209320

Postby gryffron » March 22nd, 2019, 10:20 am

spigot wrote:Hi Gryffron
I deeply resent the insulting allegation that when I thanked Itsallaguess and moderator csearle I was being ‘cynical’ and by implication my gratitude was not genuine.

Hi spigot,
My apologies if I misconstrued your words and misunderstood your motives. I confess I didn't read the entire of the thread to get the context of what had gone before. That thread is crazily long.
The post in question was reported as "off topic, as in fact was the whole discussion on formatting. So I would have deleted it anyway.

Gryffron

spigot
Lemon Pip
Posts: 75
Joined: February 8th, 2017, 7:49 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Deletion of posts

#210262

Postby spigot » March 25th, 2019, 11:22 pm

I would like to thank Itsallaguess (again for further offers of help) and moderator TJH for altering formatting in a post and offering guidance. Thanks are also due to redsturgeon allowing me to see the offending post that had been deleted.

Due to having to take eye drops and keep screen time to a minimum I have had plenty of time to reflect.
I paused while writing this post and I had to re-login at which point my post had disappeared so I had to start again.
I usually frequent the 'Polite Discussions' board where moderation is particularly important.
Moderators are volunteers providing an essential service and for that deserve gratitude,
I do however find the inconsistency irksome to say the least, believing deletion should only be employed when really necessary.
When a poster has a post deleted if he wants to challenge the deletion he is at a disadvantage because the alleged offensive post is no more. Gone.

Having said all that the owners and administrators are of course free to run TLF as they see fit and impose any rules they so wish.

gryffron wrote:The post in question was reported as "off topic, as in fact was the whole discussion on formatting. So I would have deleted it anyway.

Gryffron


I really do not seem to fit in with the ethos of TLF so goodbye.
spigot

Howyoudoin
Lemon Slice
Posts: 526
Joined: June 4th, 2018, 7:58 pm
Has thanked: 171 times
Been thanked: 164 times

Re: Deletion of posts

#210358

Postby Howyoudoin » March 26th, 2019, 11:07 am

spigot wrote:I really do not seem to fit in with the ethos of TLF so goodbye.


Posting exclusively on Polite Discussions is no good for anyone.

Try some of the other Boards. You'll find that your mental health improves considerably.

Best,

HYD


Return to “Room 101”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest