Ownership of information and the rights of users

[Tin Can]

As one of the instigators or antagonists that the OP most likely disliked, I apologize for my actions.

That said, I think we ALL have exceeded some boundary none of us really did not want to cross. OP, Mods, myself and many others.

Let's reconsider and move on.

[Racer X 69]

Sometimes the only time effective tools available to the volunteer moderators are large hammers for small problems. I would not expect a volunteer moderator to take a scalpel to a thread (like the one in this instance) and try and figure out what should stay and what should go any more than they should delete just the bad part of an offensive single post. Who has time for this?

We have some 109,076 threads and 1,166,824 posts archived here-that's right nearly 1.2 million posts!. Given that most people do not do a search before asking a question here there is tons of duplication of information in these threads. How often are full threads deleted?-very rarely frankly. I don't see much harm from this practice from the "bigger picture" POV.

If you said something important in a thread that got the axe, start a new thread and say it again-you probably have more free time than the moderators.

Great response Kirk.

Having moderated on internet forums I can attest to the difficulties of dealing with the minutia or simply dumping an entire thread. It can be tedious and cumbersome, quickly eroding time that one does not always have excess of. So often those who see something of theirs disappear fail to realize just how time consuming it can be.

They only see things from their side.

And all too often they also either fail to recognize the moderating staff are doing what they do without any compensation, or simply ignore that fact completely and act as if things should be run the way that they want.

For those who fell into the latter description I always invited them to start their own forum, and see if they could do a better job.

[Corran]

I knew this argument was going to come up. Personally I believe the moderators volunteered to make this forum the best it could be. This is addressing that idea.

If a moderator was, for instance, banning anyone who disagreed with them, would you question their work? Or would you say, well, they don't have a lot of time so I guess it's okay?

Anyway, the original thoughts I had on this have little to do with the moderation happening. I think in this case the difference in time between simply locking a thread or deleting it wholesale is nil. I don't have a real bone to pick in this instance because I didn't even post in the thread that was deleted.

However, I'm looking at the bigger picture and for the future, whether there is a policy where a poster who makes a thread can request its complete deletion. I think that is wrong and should not be allowed. And yes it might be rare. Myself, that kind of policy makes it less likely to contribute helpful information, especially in certain situations.

[cowanw]

Yes, the " support of the moderators" and " moderators are busy" arguments are, frankly, straw man arguments. I hope they are not successful in diverting the meaning of the original question.

[Kirk Gittings]

I think in this case the difference in time between simply locking a thread or deleting it wholesale is nil.

agreed

[jnantz]

....

[rdenney]

Locking a thread doesn't remove it from view, and sometimes a thread includes some scorched earth.

Occasionally, an OP will ask a question that attracts a noisy (and often noisome) response, and just wants it to go away. I have never deleted a thread like that that contained writing for the ages, but often it's just a dumb first post on which many piled, with no result that gives value to the archives. If you said something you are committed to in a thread that got deleted, and you feel as though the deletion of your post was collateral damage, just say it again in its own thread.

We will not delete a thread if the OP is asking for deletion to avoid being responsible for something we feel he should be responsible for. That is why the guidelines are worded as they are.

Before becoming a moderator, I wrote many posts of considerable length. Probably too much length for most people, but still representing a significant investment of time. Occasionally, I thought the posts rather well-written. But let's be real: It is exceedingly rare to find a post that represents significant effort that would be difficult to repeat. When such posts do get deleted, I have, at request, gone back and made a copy to send to the poster to so that he can repost it in its own thread if he so chooses. That takes more time than either locking or deleting a thread, and the content really does need to be worth preserving. How often does that happen? I've been asked to do it once, and I'm not sure any of the other mods have ever been asked to do it. But I will do it for anybody, unless the post violates the guidelines.

Truth is, most posts fall into the category of ephemera, and we all know it.

Rick "who has never used moderator powers to further his own opinion on the matter being discussed" Denney

[Kodachrome25]

This happened to me on another forum some years ago and it was incredibly frustrating because I *really* put a lot of effort into the reply to help folks out, charts, photos with overlays, etc. No matter what is right or wrong, when you put more time than usual into something and then it gets deleted, it just plain sucks.

So this is one of many reasons I *really* do better in life when I just avoid posting on forums and read-only ( if that )....I don't like wasting my time.

[analoguey]

Does the first poster really own the thread anyway, I think not. I can lay the first brick of a building but if others come along and build a skyscraper, the building is not mine. A first post is like seeding a crystal, that is how a forum works. A first post should not be treated like a completed document. Complete documents should go in the "files" section.

Indeed.
Although I haven't seen threads deleted here(missed them maybe?), I wonder how often do mods actually get a request that asks to delete a thread.
Maybe the mods could tell us?
Imho, we should start with that existing data before we prescribe solutions.

If I had made 12,000 posts between here and apug since joining the forums in 2012 and wasn't happy about the environment, I'd be wondering if part of the problem was not thinking before I typed.

+1

[rdenney]

It happens from time to time--maybe two or three times a year and not often enough to really keep track. It used to be more common in the for-sale forum, where sellers whose sale had turned sour wanted to delete a thread where the buyer complained, but that issue was largely resolved by adding the Advisories forum.

More often, but still only a handful of times a year, we delete a bunch of posts in a thread that has turned into a food fight. In those situations, there will be posts that included a couple of sentences devoted to throwing food, and maybe a few more that are relevant to the topic at hand. We have a strict policy of not editing posts, so even when only a part of it is the problem, all of it gets deleted.

And for Kodachrome25: If a post of yours that reflects considerable effort gets deleted in a way you think is unwarranted, please let us know. We might agree! We can almost always, at the very least, send you the text of the post so that you can repost it without having to rewrite it.

Rick "suspecting that very few serious and relevant posts have ever been deleted" Denney