LurkerDan

Pilot, I appreciate you taking the time to answer. But with all due respect, I think that's very weak. There are rules for all sorts of things, personal attacks was just an example. But to continue with the example, there's no inherent reason for a personal attack rule, many forums don't have them. The reason it is there is because it makes this a better place for everybody, including the mods. So just because this is not the same as the personal attack doesn't mean it isn't analogous.

You said "just because people don't like it doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed". But then you use completely circular logic. It's allowed so it should be allowed; it's not like personal attacks because people are allowed to delete threads, because we allow them and we don't allow personal attacks. Well, we get that, that's not a reason to not consider a change to that rule. There's no reason that there couldn't be a rule against it, or against deleting a thread once it reaches a threshold number of posts. It doesn't happen that often you say, but that cuts both ways. If it doesn't happen that often, instituting such a rule wouldn't cause much hardship for mods, while it would keep people from doing it in egregious circumstances. I and others spent a lot of time giving pretty detailed legal advice to someone, why should it be ok for that person to just decide to throw all of our time and effort away? That's the issue here, and that's the issue you have not really addressed.

And yes, I would like that particular thread undeleted.

X

The mods and admins have been considering this subject since the issue arose. Badgering pilot about it isn't going to accomplish anything (other than letting me laugh at him for trying to respond here before we had finished discussing it. )

I can tell you one thing, we're not going to have a public shaming list. That certainly would make this issue look more like one of trying to punish somebody instead of wishing to have one's posted wisdom available for posterity.

We have very few instances of this situation occurring. The last one was probably about six months ago and involved a quite lengthy thread of general interest. People complained about it being deleted, we looked at the value of the thread overall and decided overruling the thread creator and restoring it was the right thing to do. We have to weigh this rare occurrence against the benefit of being able to delete threads provides our members (it's done on a regular basis, much more than you would think) and the amount of work it would generate for mods who would keep being asked to delete or correct threads being started incorrectly and duplicate threads.

When that popular thread was deleted a while back I recall people deciding that they would be more careful when posting in a thread started by that person. That seems to me the best way to handle it. If somebody burns people by deleting their important posts they won't post in that person's threads again. And that person will get less responses when they ask for them.

If some of the posts made in the recently deleted thread were so useful as a searchable reference for our members I see no reason why they can't be recreated in a thread dedicated to that subject. It could be started by someone who everyone is confident won't delete it.

HistoryProf

you answered your own question....he didn't hear what he wanted to, and further got mighty a-holish with people who called him on his crap. He took his ball and went home.

Ranger

There could be some reasonable circumstances for people who want their thread deleted. Like the Betho case, I think she had their infamous thread deleted after a while because she was embarrassed about it and was getting too much crap from some members. So even if she didn't have the ability to delete the thread herself, I think any mod would have deleted it for her if she asked.

The best case of how things worked out was when Terrell accidently deleted a long SW thread and everyone was screaming at him but our hero pilot was able to bring it back.

das Monkey

I object. It's a terrible idea, and we really can't allow that kind of stuff here. I was more expressing my frustration than suggesting something we could <i>actually</i> do. Although in many ways, it's hardly different from a "Bad Trader List", we still can't do it.

That said, I do think we should have the following rights as members:

1) If we observe someone deleting a useful thread in a childish manner, we should be allowed to peacefully point out the thread topic and the member who did it in Feedback. No grandstanding or calling the guy out, but a notice nonetheless.

2) If we observe an offending member who has burned us before starting a thread on a topic we would like to discuss, we should be allowed to start our own duplicate thread on the same exact topic without admonition from the mods/admins. If these members are not going to be punished for deleting our posts, we should not be punished for finding reasonable methods to protect them.

While this is a private forum, for the sanity of all, members should have some "ownership" of their posts. If we cannot enforce this through the forum software in a way that appeases all, we deserve some level of reasonable latitude to protect those posts from people who seek to abuse the system and harm the community.

If, as the mods/admins claim, this is a rare problem, then I don't think it is unreasonable to request these 2 things be allowed when it does crop up.

das

kitkat

In a thread a few months ago on this subjuect, RandyC said:

Would changing the settings so that threads couldn't be deleted after, say, 24 hours take care of most of the nuisance issues you guys have mentioned (duplicate threads, etc.)?

I just don't think it's right that one member can delete so many other people's posts. It may not happen often, but it seems to happen regularly and it is very frustrating.

X

We've been discussing that setting.

In the two thread deleting cases I know of over the last 6+ months that time limit would have prevented only one of the threads from being deleted. And that thread is the one I undeleted anyway. Also, that time setting affects other timings as well, not just the time you can delete a thread. So I'm not sure that would be the answer.

The Antipodean

I don't think anybody should be allowed to delete threads unless they're a mod. If I made a thread and then didn't want it, I could email a mod to delete it. Not like it would happen THAT often I think. I too am still mad about the mega-long "Buffy" thread getting deleted a while back, I thought changes had been made then but I guess not. Anyway, that's my 2¢.

X

I'm puzzled about the "Buffy" thread. It would have been restorable if anyone had noticed in any kind of timely manner. Did nobody notice until the forum was pruned?

BTW, I counted 14 threads deleted by the thread creator in the last day. A couple because they went unexpectedly downhill fairly rapidly, a couple because they were dups, and the rest because they had outlived their usefullness and people were cleaning up after themselves.

kitkat

Well, when I noticed it was missing I had no idea that anything could be done about it. It was probably too late at that point, but I don't think the average DVDTalker is aware that threads can be restored by contacting mods. I only found out later when I posted in the other thread referenced above. Who knows how many people looked for the Buffy thread and gave up in silence?

BTW, it had been active as late as 7/05, and was missing by 12/05.

ETA: Maybe someone here knows how long something stays in Google's chache? In 12/05 remnemts of the thread could be found there, but by now they are gone. (I saved what I was able to dig up at the time, if anyone wants it.)

Would a 24 hour rule have allowed for most or all of those deleteions?

Bushdog

Was that the thread where she waxed poetic about being anally penetrated? Or something else?

Bandoman

She waxes her what now?

El Scorcho

I like thread deletion because the threat of it should serve as a scare tactic to get you blowhards to start getting your point across in threads within 5 sentences instead of your usual 30.

Draven

I'll weigh in with a contrary opinion - I don't think it's that big of a deal when my posts are deleted. I don't consider them my property or an online collections of my writings or anything like that. If DVDTalk went down tomorrow, the last thing I'd be concerned about is recovering my posts.

Maybe I view the forum differently than some of you, because taking time to respond to a thread is time I'm willing to spend. If the thread is deleted, so what? That's almost the same as a thread falling off the front page.

I guess I see these posts as not really being "real," so it doesn't bother me when they disappear. Seriously, how many of you go searching for your writings from months or years ago. I'm sure I've responded to hundreds of threads that I don't even remember. It just doesn't seem to be worth getting worked up over, especially if it happens as infrequently as the mods say it does.

Consider this a vote for "I'm fine with the current policy."

Numanoid

If this thread proves anything, it's that the "President of Otterville" is purely a figurehead.

kitkat

I'm just guessing, but I would think that most people go looking for old threads that they remember coming across before, or heard referenced in other threads. I seriously doubt that most people are looking for their own posts, but I also don't think it matters whose posts they're looking for or why they want them.

I realize that most of what is posted here is silly and ephemeral, and I don't really give a rat's ass whether 99.9% of it gets lost or not, but I don't see the harm in trying to hang on to the small amount that some people do care about. I bet the .1% that I care about isn't the same .1% that others in this thread are concerned about, and vice versa. I also think that at a certain point a thread belongs much more to the community than it does to the OP. Of course, in the end, it's all really up to those who administer this site.

At the end of the day I know I'm not going to lose any sleep over this however it turns out, but I'm still an interested bystander and I'll give my opinion when I have one., and yeah, this bugs me enough to post about it.

classicman2

Hear! Hear!

BigPete

I am strongly in favor of the current rules.

The Edit King

HEY!!!

Where's that bankruptual thread?Now, ain't THAT da truth!

THEEK! (Aka: )

mbs

Looks like it was also deleted. I'm glad I had a chance to read it today. That was another informative thread stricken from the record.

The Edit King

AMEN BROTHER!

It was PACKED with great info, Indeed!

Ranger

While the thread might have had some good info, I think it was apparent that some people were being too harsh with the OP and he didn't want the thread to go on. That could be his loss. I would just advise people to just let it go.

The Edit King

...but sometimes letting go is hard to do....

Buford T Pusser

Who was the OP that deleted it?

LurkerDan

strongly in favor? something tells me that you have deleted your own threads.