# Why was a thread deleted?  Ops please <<



## nossie (Nov 6, 2007)

There was a thread by elsaspet titled "I'm so effin mad right now" where Cindy/elsaspet went about harshly insulting a few people and later was criticised for said behaviour by myself and some others.

I can't find this thread now and I assume it has been deleted. Why? I was very interested in reading elsaspet's reaction to the criticism on her behaviour.


----------



## altyfc (Nov 6, 2007)

Yes, I would have been interested to see her reaction also.  I guess the mods just don't want to see further conflict between members.


----------



## LaFoto (Nov 6, 2007)

The alarm buttons went off - so by the time I came to check, the thread was already taken away from public view. This is a "last resort" thing to do when things go seriously overboard. I hope you all understand.


----------



## nossie (Nov 6, 2007)

LaFoto said:


> The alarm buttons went off - so by the time I came to check, the thread was already taken away from public view. This is a "last resort" thing to do when things go seriously overboard. I hope you all understand.


 
Not really. If I was ever hot in the head and blasted somebody I'd like to think I'd have the chance to openly apologise. I don't think that the thread was so out of order that it should have been pulled such as in the case of general racial slurs, advertising/spam, peadophile activity - you know the line. 
You can't just pull the plug just because someone clicks the alarm button. It should be substanciated.
I think elsaspet has a right to call someone a little "_whatever"_, I also think she has a right to show her_ass_, but definately she has a right to react to our criticisms.

As such if it's possible I think the thread should be reactivated.


----------



## LaFoto (Nov 6, 2007)

There is always and for everyone the chance to apologise for something like this in a new thread (just like you have started this new thread here). And a thread with all HER posts x'ed out by herself anyway is made senseless by the very OP, so why re-activate it? She has clearly withdrawn from it ... and if she feels like apologising, there is every chance to go to "New Thread".


----------



## JDS (Nov 6, 2007)

Wow..  Things must've gotten a little more heated after I left the office yesterday.  
I came back hoping to see some more news on the situation, but now it's all gone.

Anyway, I hope it all works out for Elsapet - I can only imagine how much of a pain she's dealing with right now.


----------



## nossie (Nov 6, 2007)

Hi LaFoto. (Sorry didn't say hello earlier)

Well the point would be then that the apology/rebuttal is taken out of context.

In her particular case I think she's quite comfortable insulting and offending people with her knee-jerk reactions and it's not ok that she can just delete her text and never be made take consequence for her words.
If she causes an injury to someone, it's one thing that she deletes her own words but you shouldn't take the voice away from the other people, even if that shows she's gone back over it and left a thread of blanks.  (many people will copy qoutes that can't be deleted)

Basically she's using a loophole to cover up her dirty behaviour.


----------



## terri (Nov 6, 2007)

nossie said:


> Not really. If I was ever hot in the head and blasted somebody I'd like to think I'd have the chance to openly apologise. I don't think that the thread was so out of order that it should have been pulled such as in the case of general racial slurs, advertising/spam, peadophile activity - you know the line.
> *You can't just pull the plug just because someone clicks the alarm button. It should be substanciated.*
> I think elsaspet has a right to call someone a little "_whatever"_, I also think she has a right to show her_ass_, but definately she has a right to react to our criticisms.
> 
> As such if it's possible I think the thread should be reactivated.


Actually, nossie, she can do exactly that. Please review this from the TPF FAQ's:

*



			TPF Staff
		
Click to expand...

*


> *The TPF staff includes the site owner, moderators, and editors. The entire TPF staff: *
> 
> ** reserves the right to edit, move, or delete any post with or without explanation. *


 The thread in question contained allusions to the OP attacking other members via PM, as well as formerly containing open attacks until the OP removed them. Although LaFoto did not owe an explanation, she has given one, and I back her up in that it was a reasonable action. I hope everyone agrees.


----------



## LaFoto (Nov 6, 2007)

It wasn't even ME who pulled the thread...!
PM for you, nossie.


----------



## nossie (Nov 6, 2007)

terri said:


> Actually, nossie, she can do exactly that. Please review this from the TPF FAQ's:


 
Yes I was actually going to correct myself from "you can't" to "you shouldn't" but I thought to myself "naaa they won't pick you up on a choice of words". 
I was thinking in moral terms - not technical or legal. I thought that was obvious. I see now I must be more correct about the choice of words I use or should I just go back and edit the previous post? Hence nullifying the continuity of the thread, but hey that's partly the point of the thread right?


----------



## terri (Nov 6, 2007)

nossie said:


> Yes I was actually going to correct myself from "you can't" to "you shouldn't" but I thought to myself "naaa they won't pick you up on a choice of words".
> I was thinking in moral terms - not technical or legal. I thought that was obvious. I see now I must be more correct about the choice of words I use or should I just go back and edit the previous post? Hence nullifying the continuity of the thread, but hey that's partly the point of the thread right?


:scratch: Okay. 

 Don't sweat it; just wanted to make sure we were all on the same page!


----------



## Chris of Arabia (Nov 6, 2007)

For the record, it was myself who took the decision to move the thread. I had asked that the OP took a step back from the situation, unfortunately that wasn't what was happening. At a later point, other forum members were posting in the thread requesting some form of moderation and ultimately more than one member chose to report various items within it.

Before any action was taken though, Cindy chose to remove all of her contributions to the thread, making it pretty meaningless all in all. It was at that point that I consigned it to history.

Whilst it's not widely disseminated information, my role here is primarily to deal with the never ending stream of spam we seem to suffer. Given the relatively small number of moderators at TPF, I do occasionally take steps to cover off other matters where my permissions allow me to do something appropriate - moving a thread such as this is one such step. I only do this when I feel world timezones would prevent the real mods doing something, as even mods have to sleep and work sometime.

I should also point out that I did contact the OP via OM to explain my actions. She has since acknowleged that and confirmed she has no issue with what I did. I assume those who reported posts in this instance are also comfortable with the action. For the rest of you, I guess you will just have to accept that I moved the post with the best of intentions.

Now, if anyone would like to ask me an interesting question over at this weeks MOTW thread, I'll do my best to oblige


----------



## nossie (Nov 6, 2007)

I'm cool. :goodvibe:





​


----------



## Lol999 (Nov 6, 2007)

Damn! I read some of the thread and then it's gone! Okay, so who were the main protagonists having a handbag swinging session?:mrgreen:


----------



## Lol999 (Nov 6, 2007)

Okay, so now I'm getting a personal message accusing me of being sexist because I refer to handbags when describing a spat. if this is the level this forum is descending to then I'm going to post somewhere else and those who are offended can shove it.


----------



## elsaspet (Nov 6, 2007)

nossie said:


> Not really. If I was ever hot in the head and blasted somebody I'd like to think I'd have the chance to openly apologise. I don't think that the thread was so out of order that it should have been pulled such as in the case of general racial slurs, advertising/spam, peadophile activity - you know the line.
> You can't just pull the plug just because someone clicks the alarm button. It should be substanciated.
> I think elsaspet has a right to call someone a little "_whatever"_, I also think she has a right to show her_ass_, but definately she has a right to react to our criticisms.
> 
> As such if it's possible I think the thread should be reactivated.


 
And I also have the right not to. 
Perhaps you think it's alright that I was personally attacked first on the original thread.  Apparently my being upset about a bad situation meant that I was not cut out to handle weddings.
Stirring the pot will only wear your arms out.


----------



## nossie (Nov 6, 2007)

Lol999 said:


> ... so who were the main protagonists having a handbag swinging session?:mrgreen:


 


Lol999 said:


> Okay, so now I'm getting a personal message accusing me of being sexist because I refer to handbags when describing a spat.


 
Yes well I can clearly see the problem here Lol999, you didn't apologise for any offense that you may have caused to any Handbags or Swingers.
Not all handbags are swingers and not all swingers are handbags.
Just out of curiosity was it a Handbag or a Swinger that sent you the pm? Perhaps even a Swinging Handbag?





Lol999 said:


> if this is the level this forum is descending to then I'm going to post somewhere else.


Naa don't do that, most of us here enjoy a little laugh so don't let the few weiners put you off. _(no offense to weiners)_

:hugs:


----------



## jols (Nov 6, 2007)

i missed half the thread and didnt see someone attack you, serves me right for sleeping i suppose.

i did think you were going over the top a tad but i could tell you were really angry and its good to let out your anger.

is there any news?:mrgreen:


----------



## Joxby (Nov 6, 2007)

Lol999 said:


> Okay, so now I'm getting a personal message accusing me of being sexist because I refer to handbags when describing a spat. if this is the level this forum is descending to then I'm going to post somewhere else and those who are offended can shove it.



Brit slang doesn't travel well across the Atlantic, be sure to show jaw dropping offence, next time "fanny" is mentioned, or else we'll get brow beaten into thinking there is only one version of English and it exists on that side of the planet.
Srsly tho, just don't bite, its their ignorance..


----------



## Lol999 (Nov 6, 2007)

nossie said:


> Not all handbags are swingers and not all swingers are handbags.
> Just out of curiosity was it a Handbag or a Swinger that sent you the pm? Perhaps even a Swinging Handbag?



You see that's the problem. I don't know anyone well enough to call them either a bag (hand or otherwise), or a swinger. Makes it difficult in social situations. Either one is going to shed garments in a flash, so that'sno indication either. Difficult times to be sure.


----------



## Lol999 (Nov 6, 2007)

Joxby said:


> Brit slang doesn't travel well across the Atlantic, be sure to show jaw dropping offence, next time "fanny" is mentioned, or else we'll get brow beaten into thinking there is only one version of English and it exists on that side of the planet.
> Srsly tho, just don't bite, its their ignorance..



Isn't it the same? We invent something, then someone else takes it and thinks their version is better!


----------



## nossie (Nov 6, 2007)

elsaspet said:


> And I also have the right not to.
> Perhaps you think it's alright that I was personally attacked first on the original thread. Apparently my being upset about a bad situation meant that I was not cut out to handle weddings.
> Stirring the pot will only wear your arms out.


 
Firstly I don't think it's ok that anyone attacks anyone else but I accept that it's going to happen. In this case if I had read the attack on you I could have called a 50/50 and perhaps helped to get everyone's energy back on the problem.  

If you hadn't deleted everything you wrote then maybe people could substanciate your claim. This knee-jerk type attack and then the later turn around is something I've seen you do before - writing a post, making the insult, and then deleting the post.  It's a poor show of you either lacking the conviction of your words or not willing to accept the consequences (which would further suggest that you know you're doing something wrong to begin with)

All I know is that you were telling another user "F*(&You" and calling him a "Wanna be photographer" and crapped on about earning $6k for a job like we should care.  And then there was the insults to the lady who was "poor" etc.  

I'm not the only person that read it like this.


----------



## Joxby (Nov 6, 2007)

Lol999 said:


> Isn't it the same? We invent something, then someone else takes it and thinks their version is better!



You cant generalize :lmao:.
When peeps are boiling, they do sometimes just grab at straws.


----------



## jols (Nov 6, 2007)

$6000 for a wedding     bloody hell people must be mad to pay that     $6000  good god

your good but not that good

im dumbfounded


$6000 i cant stop saying it.    $6000    PHEW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Lol999 (Nov 6, 2007)

Joxby said:


> You cant generalize :lmao:.
> When peeps are boiling, they do sometimes just grab at straws.


Darn. Keep forgetting dry humour just doesn't transmit over the internet:mrgreen:


----------

