Deleted Threads

[Axleuk]

Mods, when deleting a post or a thread, please have the common decency to either inform the person in question why the post has been deleted or leave a polite note explaining why. This would go a long way in rectifying any issues.

 

[Ferris]

As i said to you in my PM - the rules are there for all to see. General chat and spam threads/posts are not welcome on this board. Most post edits/removals result in a PM to the member concerned - indeed that is certainly my policy but sometimes time is a factor and sometimes the reason is so obvious - it just doesn't need saying.

F

 

[backtotropical]

If you are going to post stuff which doesn't belong here (and its set out quite simply in the terms and conditions), expect to have it deleted. Simple.

 

[Tolak]

If you are going to post stuff which doesn't belong here (and its set out quite simply in the terms and conditions), expect to have it deleted. Simple.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Axleuk]

I can understand threads which are blatently deleted that are off topic, i dont have issues with that, it is to be expected, however when a post is deleted where is falls under the category description then an explanation would be nice. The thread i am addressing is a photo of a chicken on stilts with a funny caption. As far as i was aware it fell under the category described as 'For cool photographs which are not related to fish, such as other pet photos, or pictures of yourself'.

Judging by the replies it received, people felt it was interesting enough.

However this thread remains undeleted in the same sub forum http/www.fishforums.net/content/Non-Fish...hs/253306/Test/ and also this one http/www.fishforums.net/content/Non-Fish...-Its-Soo-Sweet/ both of which do not fall under the description.

Is there any reason why they remain undeleted ?

 

[JenCliBee]

Maybe they just dont like u axleuk lol

 

[Axleuk]

Maybe they just dont like u axleuk lol

It appears that way

 

[rocknurworld2006]

If you are going to post stuff which doesn't belong here (and its set out quite simply in the terms and conditions), expect to have it deleted. Simple.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

i agree

 

[spesh]

If you are going to post stuff which doesn't belong here (and its set out quite simply in the terms and conditions), expect to have it deleted. Simple.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Not everyone can digest the rules and retain them in memory all of the time. Different forums have different rules. New users may not be familiar. etc.

There are many many reasons why someone should have a cursory PM as to why a post was deleted, decent manners being the main reason imo.

I've not been here long and find it quite friendly, relaxed and enjoyable. However blind "its in the rules so you should know" stuff is far from friendly!!

 

[Bignose]

spesh,

I respectfully disagree.

In contrast to your main point, almost every forum has rules about staying on topic. Fish forums ask that the fish sections only have threads about fish. Golf forums ask that the golf section only have discussions about golf. Motorcycle forums have rules that only topics about motorcycles are posted. This is internet-wide. Most forum moderators will move or delete off-topic threads very quickly.

And secondly, ignorance of the law is no excuse. If you were driving 55 mph in a 45 mph, the arresting officer isn't going to care one lick that you didn't see the speed limit posting. It is your responsibility as a driver to make yourself aware of the speed limit and obey it. Just like it is your responsibility to follow the rules of the forum when you signed up to become a member.

You explicitly stated that you would abide by the rules when you agreed to become a member -- it is right there in the text. Being lazy and clicking through it is not an excuse not to follow the rules.

 

[5teady_2012]

Still does not answer the question why the other threads wasnt deleted though does it, the pic was in the non fish photo section and acrtually related the thread, so how can you start saying anything about the rules when they actually was not broken (remember-it was in the non fish photograph section)

 

[Arfie]

And secondly, ignorance of the law is no excuse. If you were driving 55 mph in a 45 mph, the arresting officer isn't going to care one lick that you didn't see the speed limit posting.

To continue that example and take it further, I would expect the arresting officer to tell me what I had done wrong and suggest that I don't do it wrong in the future. Even speed camera's tell you what you've done wrong, ie doing XX mph in a YY zone.

So as the OP was about being told what was wrong, I think your example is an excellent one.

Arfie

 

[Bignose]

Still does not answer the question why the other threads wasnt deleted though does it, the pic was in the non fish photo section and acrtually related the thread, so how can you start saying anything about the rules when they actually was not broken (remember-it was in the non fish photograph section)

I was merely replying to spesh's comment.

I think that the bigger point is that sometimes mods don't always have the time to write out a detailed note that cites the exact rule the mod thought was broken. Mods have lives too! And, the rules do have judgments that have to be made. If in the mod's judgment a rule has been broken but he doesn't have time to fix it right then, should he leave it alone and hope some other mod catches it? Or fix it without leaving a detailed note?

I would personally vote for fix it. It is better to prevent the rules-offending thread from being seen by too many people, lest people think that they can break the rules themselves. If the mod leaves it for someone else to fix or until he has time to leave a detailed note, the thread may exist for a long, long time prompting others to make similar rules-offending threads meaning exponentially more work in the future.

This is like treating an entire tank for ich even though only one fish is showing spots. if at all possible, you don't sit around and wait for all the fish to have the spots, because then it is a lot more work and riskier for the fish. If you are a mod and you see a rules-breaking thread, you nip it in the bud as soon as possible so that you have less work to do in the future.

And, while in some of our eyes the thread may not have broken the rules, in the judgment of the mods, it did. That is what the mods are here for. This is not a democracy. It is an autocracy with William at the top and the other people William gives power to . They were given power by William because he feels that their judgment is sound in interpreting the rules. So, it was in the mod's judgment that this thread was breaking the rules. So it was dealt with. Really, it is as simple as that.

And, I do really hope that this doesn't come off sounding harsh or mean -- because it is not meant to be taken in that way -- but, by being a member here on the forum you've agreed to be ruled by the autocratic leadership. If you don't agree with the autocracy, then you are free to join a different forum with different rules.

I for one think that the mods and William do an excellent job at moderating such a busy forum.

 

[5teady_2012]

Still does not answer the question why the other threads wasnt deleted though does it, the pic was in the non fish photo section and acrtually related the thread, so how can you start saying anything about the rules when they actually was not broken (remember-it was in the non fish photograph section)

I was merely replying to spesh's comment.

I think that the bigger point is that sometimes mods don't always have the time to write out a detailed note that cites the exact rule the mod thought was broken. Mods have lives too! And, the rules do have judgments that have to be made. If in the mod's judgment a rule has been broken but he doesn't have time to fix it right then, should he leave it alone and hope some other mod catches it? Or fix it without leaving a detailed note?

I would personally vote for fix it. It is better to prevent the rules-offending thread from being seen by too many people, lest people think that they can break the rules themselves. If the mod leaves it for someone else to fix or until he has time to leave a detailed note, the thread may exist for a long, long time prompting others to make similar rules-offending threads meaning exponentially more work in the future.

This is like treating an entire tank for ich even though only one fish is showing spots. if at all possible, you don't sit around and wait for all the fish to have the spots, because then it is a lot more work and riskier for the fish. If you are a mod and you see a rules-breaking thread, you nip it in the bud as soon as possible so that you have less work to do in the future.

And, while in some of our eyes the thread may not have broken the rules, in the judgment of the mods, it did. That is what the mods are here for. This is not a democracy. It is an autocracy with William at the top and the other people William gives power to . They were given power by William because he feels that their judgment is sound in interpreting the rules. So, it was in the mod's judgment that this thread was breaking the rules. So it was dealt with. Really, it is as simple as that.

And, I do really hope that this doesn't come off sounding harsh or mean -- because it is not meant to be taken in that way -- but, by being a member here on the forum you've agreed to be ruled by the autocratic leadership. If you don't agree with the autocracy, then you are free to join a different forum with different rules.

I for one think that the mods and William do an excellent job at moderating such a busy forum.

I didnt even read all cos to be honest, i cant be arsed (dont take it wrong way, its just you put lot instead of keeping it simple)....

When a mod goes in to thread and sees a bad post, its as simple as clicking delete post, but, its just as simple to click edit, then just delete the content and put, removed due to (whatever the reason) if you cant spare an extra 10-20 seconds to do that, then seriously, you shouldnt be a mod..

There is no reason to delete a full post, simply just edit it to make it appropriate..


Simple things like this make such a better forum and mod team.

 

[modaz]

Still does not answer the question why the other threads wasnt deleted though does it, the pic was in the non fish photo section and acrtually related the thread, so how can you start saying anything about the rules when they actually was not broken (remember-it was in the non fish photograph section)

I was merely replying to spesh's comment.

I think that the bigger point is that sometimes mods don't always have the time to write out a detailed note that cites the exact rule the mod thought was broken. Mods have lives too! And, the rules do have judgments that have to be made. If in the mod's judgment a rule has been broken but he doesn't have time to fix it right then, should he leave it alone and hope some other mod catches it? Or fix it without leaving a detailed note?

I would personally vote for fix it. It is better to prevent the rules-offending thread from being seen by too many people, lest people think that they can break the rules themselves. If the mod leaves it for someone else to fix or until he has time to leave a detailed note, the thread may exist for a long, long time prompting others to make similar rules-offending threads meaning exponentially more work in the future.

This is like treating an entire tank for ich even though only one fish is showing spots. if at all possible, you don't sit around and wait for all the fish to have the spots, because then it is a lot more work and riskier for the fish. If you are a mod and you see a rules-breaking thread, you nip it in the bud as soon as possible so that you have less work to do in the future.

And, while in some of our eyes the thread may not have broken the rules, in the judgment of the mods, it did. That is what the mods are here for. This is not a democracy. It is an autocracy with William at the top and the other people William gives power to . They were given power by William because he feels that their judgment is sound in interpreting the rules. So, it was in the mod's judgment that this thread was breaking the rules. So it was dealt with. Really, it is as simple as that.

And, I do really hope that this doesn't come off sounding harsh or mean -- because it is not meant to be taken in that way -- but, by being a member here on the forum you've agreed to be ruled by the autocratic leadership. If you don't agree with the autocracy, then you are free to join a different forum with different rules.

I for one think that the mods and William do an excellent job at moderating such a busy forum.

I didnt even read all cos to be honest, i cant be arsed (dont take it wrong way, its just you put lot instead of keeping it simple)....

When a mod goes in to thread and sees a bad post, its as simple as clicking delete post, but, its just as simple to click edit, then just delete the content and put, removed due to (whatever the reason) if you cant spare an extra 10-20 seconds to do that, then seriously, you shouldnt be a mod..

There is no reason to delete a full post, simply just edit it to make it appropriate..


Simple things like this make such a better forum and mod team.

well said 5teady I think it is down right rude just deleting posts, ammendments are more appropriate in these matters and then when viewed people will see that the mods are actively viewing posts and making changes as needed with a sutble note attatched to it.

Bignose, stop sucking up.