deleted posts

[pjsoap]

I prefer open discussions about some of the deleted posts. I've sent inquiries never to receive anything in return. I feel things are also less bias when things are more open so we can all see what the issue was and why there was action taken against any particular post and/or poster?

[mamabarri]

the mods understand , as should you, that them discussing the reason a post or thread was deleted would be a serious invasion of the privacy of said poster. if you have sent inquiries about why any posts/threads but your own were deleted, YOU are attempting to invade that poster's privacy. you have no right to do that, or to ask the mods to do it either.
if a post of mine is deleted, the mods will tell ME why. it isn't YOUR business. if you want to know, ask the poster who was deleted. it's up to THEM if they choose to share that information with you, and nobody else. in my case, i would tell you straight upthat it's none of your business, and frankly, i wouldn't be very polite about it either.
we have 1000's of posters here, i can count on 2 hands the people i would share that information with if they asked, but they wouldn't ask. and neither should you.

[Holly99]

I agree with you 100%

[pjsoap]

It isn't an invasion if a person agrees to be given a public reason. It can be a waiver or even another box to check like for notifications. It is another's business if something was posted on a very public board. It would be a description of what, which, and why a specific rule was violated.

[Moore ideas]

The guidelines specifically state that posters need to contact moderators privately if they have questions about their own removed posts or topics. This is out of respect for poster privacy; it's no one else's business to know what rule you violated. Also, posts and topics are not removed in a "biased" manner. They are removed only if they're in violation of the rules or are in response to another post that was in violation of a rule and, therefore, no longer makes any sense. Think how you might feel if you made a rule violation inside a thread and another poster asked where your post went -- maybe even accusing the moderators of bias in their removal of your comment -- and the moderators publicly replied that your post was removed, let's say for example, because you had a history of actor bashing and your new post was filled with actor bashing again and this time you were gonna get banned for it, and so it had nothing whatsoever to do with biased moderation. That would not be okay...

Also, if your rule violation was completely accidental and your very first one, you'd be mortified!

The moderators are busy and also aren't always on the site, so we may not see a message right away. Please try again (especially through direct email) if you haven't received a response to an inquiry. We want posters to understand the rules and are here to do that. If you were asking about someone else's removal, then we would never give you that information anyway.

Hope this helps clear up our policy a little more when it comes to respecting individuals posters' privacy...

[pjsoap]

I wouldn't be mortified for clarification to be posted on a very public board. It's strange though when a post was deleted after a reply to it was made but the reply wasn't deleted. Therefore the mods should have seen it within the thread while they were online. I've sent inquiries to mods and have never received a response. I don't have a habit of breaking rules in general. I've also seen posts from others that didn't receive a response and from some questioning why certain ones were deleted. I have seen you publicly address which rule was broken and explain why. I don't feel you violated anyone's privacy by doing so. I've actually appreciated when you've publicly helped me with it and when I've read you doing it for others.

[Shoelover]

How do I contact a moderator privately to inquire about a deleted post? Thanks.

[pjsoap]

I'm not sure how to privately contact anyone on these boards. If you click on the username name yo can directly contact any certain person. You could do that and then ask for private contact info.

[Moore ideas]

pjsoap, we're able to comment to a point about closed or deleted threads -- broadly -- but we don't answer questions publicly about an individual poster's violations. I've posted numerous thread advisories, for example, inside a topic to remind posters about certain guidelines. I've also noted when closing threads why that thread is being closed (too many violations, went off topic...) We'll also leave an indication about why a post was edited, but we won't get too specific. But what the moderators won't do inside a discussion thread is to answer a poster's specific personal question about why his/her comment was removed. That needs to be done privately. About the reply to a deletion...I'm not sure what that was, but normally we'll remove responses to deleted comments. We also try to remove violations when they're quoted in a reply, but we just don't always see everything.

[pjsoap]

I'm not saying that it's your regular policy. It's just that sometimes you're helpful right then in the moment and I appreciate that. Such as commenting in the live thread. You helped point out within the thread and publicly what was the violation and why. You helped clear things up. I don't feel that time or a few others were an invasion of any privacy. I'm not trying to beat this topic to death. I was just giving feedback of how I feel about such issues.

[Moore ideas]

Thank you, pjsoap. The moderators want very much for people to understand the rules and where things are going wrong, and I also completely understand that you're not trying to beat the topic to death! HAHA. I'm just trying to say that there's a difference between giving a broad reminder within a topic, when things are starting to go astray -- and usually by more than just one person -- and actually publicly calling out an individual poster for a rule violation. I'm really glad to know that those thread advisories are helpful. To tell you the truth, the broad philosophy here is to preserve as much as possible. That's why we take the time to edit (when we have the time), why we close threads instead of delete them when there's enough there to preserve, and why we make an effort to steer threads back on topic and within the guidelines. Unfortunately, we can't always do that, but that's the goal.

[tiff5555]

Sometimes I wonder why some gets deleted. Mostly is because of the same thing again and again from members in one thread and baiting, even thou, it's hard to tell. All I can say is, read the guidelines rules and even what Moore ideas said here You'll be good! Actually we all as members here!

[Moore ideas]

I completely understand why posters sometimes wonder about removals, tiff5555, because non-moderators don't see everything that the moderators can see; you're essentially looking at a different board!

Sometimes topics are deleted for rule violations that are not as high up on the scale of being egregious offenses as others are, but they're still guidelines violations just the same. For example, putting spoiler information in the title of a spoiler thread is very problematic, because that's going to upset a whole lot of posters who are spoiler free. Another topic might be removed, though, because it has a vague title, whereas the post inside is not in violation of the rules. Maybe that thread was titled "Carly" or "What do you...." In some cases, the moderators will take the time to tweak the title for the poster, but if the new topic was created by someone who already has a history of using vague titles (or we've just recently had a stuck board advisory on why vague titles are a problem), that topic is going to go bye-bye. Then the poster will wonder "what did I do wrong?" Or they'll violate the rules a second time by creating an OT topic asking "What happened to my thread?!" That, too, will be removed and now the poster thinks that the mods are randomly removing their topics, and the misperception of ongoing "bias" continues... So just to repeat what's been said a number of times before, the moderators all have different opinions on the various characters, couples and storylines; we are not aligned in one point of view. Secondly, every single action we take (even if we simply add a comma to a thread title) is dated and time stamped for ALL moderators to see -- and Dan too. If any moderator were found to be taking unwarranted actions, that moderator would be removed. I'm repeating all of this, because I think it's important for posters to have confidence that their moderators, as volunteers, are truly trying to do their very best to keep the boards working smoothly and in a respectful manner. Sometimes we make mistakes or might have made a different decision about a removal than another mod made, but as long as the moderating choices are within proper parameters, then it all boils down to just trying to do the best that we, as fallible humans, can possibly do.

[pjsoap]

Sometimes I wonder why some gets deleted. Mostly is because of the same thing again and again from members in one thread and baiting, even thou, it's hard to tell. All I can say is, read the guidelines rules and even what Moore ideas said here You'll be good! Actually we all as members here!

I've never been an internet type of rebel so I'm not worried about it. I can easily discuss anything, even politics, because I have no problem sticking to the issues rather than resorting to personal attacks. I do have a high sense of fairness and honor so I sometimes take on advocacy when I could just overlook it.
I believe transparency helps keeps things as fair as possible especially when human emotions are concerned. It's human nature to have likes & dislikes and be somewhat partial to them. I prefer when reasons are laid out openly.

Just an example:
There was a thread awhile back rating the physical appearances of the actresses like they were entrees at a restaurant and it remained on the board and had several posts and was well noticed but then there was a thread about an actress being thin and it was quickly removed before any replies were made. I didn't start either thread. Neither OPs were overly negative or loving. These women are just doing a job and aren't portraying the parts of runway models. They look as good as many of their real life counterparts. If you wouldn't say it to the face of a real life nurse then you shouldn't publicly say it to or about one who plays the part of a nurse on TV. It isn't about having a 'thick skin' but about not being rude. If you like someone's hair then you may tell them but if you don't then you'd likely just not mention it. The performers shouldn't be open to less or more criticism. Two similar threads and one flourished though another was deleted.

There's been others regarding gush threads, hate threads, mtsmtsmts posts, etc. I don't want to feel like I'm policing the board. That's a tough job I'd never want.

[Moore ideas]

Please remember that the moderators cannot see everything -- even if a thread that's against the rules is active. For example: One GH moderator has been out of town and not on the internet recently, another GH moderator has had her hands full with other site commitments and family issues, and I have actually been wretchedly sick for the past six weeks (as in a whole heck of a lot of pain -- missing a relative's high school graduation and celebrating my own wedding anniversary because of it so probably missed a whole bunch of SOC rule violations too), but, thankfully, I'm finally better now! So we try to "do it all", but can't... In the meantime, aside from trying to keep up with site violations, handling ongoing questions about site glitches, being out of town, not feeling well (or whatever else), we still have the usual real-life daily commitments that others have. Two of our GH moderators, for example, have younger children to take care of, several of our site moderators have full-time jobs, and many of us have other non-SOC commitments that regularly take our time and attention. This isn't meant to be a complaint; we agreed to volunteer for this when we were asked to do it, but it's just the reality of it. We miss stuff, and that often morphs into the old "moderator bias" accusation...

I'm not sure which threads pjsoap is referencing, but generally speaking a discussion that compares actors' physical appearances would not be permitted. Sometimes posters try to mask the inappropriate comments by substituting characters' names, but if the conversation is about the actor's own face/body, then it's a violation.

PS -- One of the changes with the new site is that ALL moderators are now getting ALL reported posts/threads. It used to be that reports went to the moderators of the board that contained the potential violation, but now we're all getting everything. There has always been a separate location where the moderators could SEE all the violations for every board, but the email notifications were only sent to the moderator who were responsible for the board where the possible violation appeared. So hopefully, we'll be able to respond more quickly and completely with this new system of notification.

[pjsoap]

I'm glad you'd doing better. That is most important.
I was referring to a post that had been there for awhile and was clearly seen by whichever moderator was on the board during that time. That is just one example. one example I used regarding a generality. I do like that now all moderators can see reports and whatnot because that would help you with the load.
I wasn't trying to single anyone out but only pointing out that sometimes reading the rules wasn't all there was to it. I'm glad things are now more clear and that does help.
Thanks again to you and I really am glad you're now doing well.

[Moore ideas]

Thanks so much -- I appreciate it! I really am feeling much better these past few days...

Just to address the violation that wasn't removed, I wish I could give you an adequate answer. Honestly, I kind of wish that everyone could take a turn moderating, because it's a real eye-opener when you first start doing it! HA. So not knowing all the circumstances of the unaddressed violation, all I can say is that it's possible that the moderator entered the thread at a point beyond where the violation occurred (maybe in response to a specific post down-topic that was reported), got distracted by something else, or just scanned the post without really reading it carefully enough. I confess that sometimes I've had to read a reported post several times, before I've noticed the specific thing that concerned the poster who reported it. Sometimes it's immediately obvious, but sometimes it isn't. And sometimes, even a post that's been reported turns out not to be an actual violation at all. But without seeing the actual language in the one we're talking about I can't really answer beyond that; I'd be making it up! I know it can sometimes be confusing about what's removed and what isn't, and I apologize for that... Without meaning to sound like a broken record, the best thing to do if you think there's a problem on the boards is to contact us directly, either by reporting or through our profiles. Hopefully, the moderators will get their names listed in a central location again, and that should help too. Also -- about the profiles -- reported posts are showing up there too now (which means that we have a lot of messages), so we may not notice a brand new private message right away.

[pjsoap]

I've noticed that you now edit the posts instead of always just deleting the entire thing. That's good. No one reason to erase an entire message for a mere one or few words.

[pjsoap]

What about the thread on two actors maybe leaving GH on the GH board?
It was started yesterday and a moderator also posted within it. It had less posts than other threads that were still open and posts within it were civil so why was it closed and gone? News regarding the actors are a part of this site. Comings and goings, even speculated ones are often discussed on the board(s).

[Moore ideas]

The thread had 101 posts, which is significant. It went downhill when posters continued to speculate on the private lives of the actors and/or what was in their minds about negotiations, the terms of the negotiations, etc. As far as we know here on SOC, none of those posters are members of the actors' families or are an integral part of their contract negotiations. Therefore, their posts were nothing beyond baseless speculation and gossip. That's not allowed.

[pjsoap]

It had a lesser number than that when it was closed. I've also seen some with more. I didn't see anything in there about their families. Their lives are often discussed on these boards. We hear about comings & goings, pregnancies & birth announcements, tragedies & loss, etc. It was about speculations based on internet rumors which is often discussed on the boards. There was a number of posts regarding a transgender character joining GH before any spoilers confirmed it and now it's being discussed further as part of a Liz storyline.

It just seems that there's sometimes a difference made regarding who it's about. If there was an issue with particular posts then why not just delete those as what has happened with others threads? Or even edited the certain issues within specific posts as what has taken place lately in others?