I'm all in favor of locking a thread that is off the rails, but pretending it never happened in the first place?

Job badly done, mods.

What do you mean? We have always been at war with Eastasia.

There is no war in Ba Sing Se

Which thread?

15 hours ago, Red Castle said:

War has Changed video

Lies! We all know that War. War never changes.

On 9/17/2018 at 8:08 AM, Animewarsdude said:

Which thread?

The imagined one

23 hours ago, Marinealver said:

The imagined one

Good......joke?

Still don’t have the faintest idea what you’re talking about.

I'm talking about a thread that existed previously and then disappeared.

Does that give you a faint idea?

Pics or it didn't happen.

15 minutes ago, Sekac said:

I'm talking about a thread that existed previously and then disappeared.

Does that give you a faint idea?

No, not remotely.

Since I read dozens of threads every day, and there is no chance that I could’ve looked at every single one that has been posted, and neither you nor anyone else has provided any indication at all what the topic of the thread in question was about, I don’t have the slightest idea IF a topic was deleted, much less what it was about.

And based on animewars post above, I’m not the only one.

1 hour ago, Forgottenlore said:

No, not remotely.

Since I read dozens of threads every day, and there is no chance that I could’ve looked at every single one that has been posted, and neither you nor anyone else has provided any indication at all what the topic of the thread in question was about, I don’t have the slightest idea IF a topic was deleted, much less what it was about.

And based on animewars post above, I’m not the only one.

So you're not so much looking for a faint idea as much as a specific explanation.

I have a hard time imagining how explaining which one results in anything but a "huh, how about that" response so it seems pointless. But if you insist...

The thread was called "The Last Jedi is NOT the reason Solo failed at the box office" or something like that. It was 4 pages long and last seen on the top of this subforum on the morning of September 14th.

Not sure why @FTS Gecko above doesn't believe it happened considering the last 2 pages were dominated by he and another user going back and forth about the merits of TLJ.

I don't know what comment it was that lead the mods to feel that revising history was better than simply locking it but that's a bad precident and accomplishes nothing.

They did a bad job of doing their jobs.

Now, do you have a super specific idea of what I'm talking about?

2 minutes ago, Sekac said:

I don't know what comment it was that lead the mods to feel that revising history was better than simply locking it but that's a bad precident and accomplishes nothing.

I imagine it was the comment suggesting that people who have valid complaints about The Last Jedi are all white male misogynists.

Or, you know, it might have been the poster of the thread actually requesting that it be locked and deleted? One of the two.

1 hour ago, FTS Gecko said:

I imagine it was the comment suggesting that people who have valid complaints about The Last Jedi are all white male misogynists.

Or, you know, it might have been the poster of the thread actually requesting that it be locked and deleted? One of the two.

That could be it. There was entirely too much hate from every direction in it. The tone of that whole thread was crappy.

They probably torpedoed it over the Disney-bashing and incredibly sexist linked videos. Can’t say that I blame them.

2 hours ago, FTS Gecko said:

I imagine it was the comment suggesting that people who have valid complaints about The Last Jedi are all white male misogynists.

Yes, thank you for illustrating exactly why deleting the thread was a mistake. As you demonstrate effectively above, it allows people to misrepresent comments with impunity. The comment didn't say "all", didn't say "people who have valid points", and didn't say "white". Those were embellishments you added for your own purposes.

The comment was incendiary regardless, im not defending it, but stating that there are people that don't like the new movies beacause they're mysoginsts is very different from the version you're claiming.

Lock worthy? Sure. What does deleting it do?

I mean, who knows, it might have been when you threatened to eat the babies of the user you were debating with that got the thread deleted.

If only there was some way we could find out which it was... ?

2 hours ago, FTS Gecko said:

Or  , you know, it might have been the poster of the thread  actually requesting that it be locked and deleted  ? One of the two  .    

So?

If someone wants complete control over a conversation, then perhaps a blog is a better place to put their thoughts than on a public forum.

Starting a thread and then later deciding to retroactively waste the time of everyone who tried to participate because you (not you , specifically, I don't know (or care) who started the thread) didn't like where it went is pretty lame. Sure it's the OP's thread, but it's everyone else's too.

1 hour ago, TopHatGorilla said:

That could be it. There was entirely too much hate from every direction in it. The tone of that whole thread was crappy.

A justifiable reason to lock it and let it sink to the bottom pages, not a justifiable reason to delete it. Heck, issue warnings, if necessary. I'm all for it. I got one before and deserved it. The thread got locked eventually, i apologized earnestly, and it's all good.

By sweeping unpleasant conversations under the rug, nobody who crossed the line can be held accountable, nobody who toed the line can learn a lesson from it, and nobody who acted in good faith can prove it.

3 hours ago, Sekac said:

So   you're not so much looking for a f  aint idea as much as a specific explanatio  n. 

Since that is kind of the point of posting a thread, to tell people what you are talking about. Yeah.

3 hours ago, Sekac said:

The   t  hre  ad was called "The Last  Jedi is NOT the reason So  lo faile  d at the box o  ffice" 

Ok, yeah. I glanced at that one a few times but stopped bothering with it because it was pretty obviously not going to be a productive thread.

3 hours ago, Sekac said:

I   h  ave a hard time imagining how explaining which one results in anything but a "huh, how a  bout that"

Well, if you had actually identified the topic of the thread in the original post it would have saved at least 4 posts in the thread and however many people read the thread and left confused because it didn’t actually contain any content.

3 hours ago, Sekac said:

Now  , do you have a super  specific idea of what I'm talking about? 

Not super specific, no. As I don’t actually know or care what the specific content was, but I do now know what the actual topic you’re talking about is, and have a general idea of the content and participants of the thread in question, which was all I was looking for in the opening post. And it only took you 4 posts and almost a week to provide an actual topic for the thread.

As for why I want to know, even though I don’t care particularly about the actual thread or it’s contents (which I imagine is probably your next question), I find it is a good idea to have a general sense of the moderating style and limits on any board I post on. Deleting an entire thread is a pretty drastic step for mods to make, and knowing under what conditions they will take that step helps fill in some of that knowledge.

4 hours ago, Forgottenlore said:

Well, if you had actually            identified the topic of the           thread in the original post it would have saved at  least 4 posts in the thread and however many people read the thread and left confused because it didn’t  actually contain any content.

No, it had content...to the mods. My intent was not to inform the community at large that there was a thread that was deleted, nor what that thread was.

My intent was very, very clearly a notice to the mods that I saw their work and to say they made a poor choice when attempting to execute it.

I didn't think the mods needed the specificity, I assumed they didn't have enough threads they deleted in the Off Topic forum within minutes of my post that it would cause confusion. Heck, I assumed this thread would be locked before a discussion even happened. If revising history is the new MO, then this is...well...a loose thread.

As I pointed out before, a conversation started is only partially mine so y'all are certainly welcome to post your inquiries, and I don't mind answering. But it's a little odd to presume some obligation to explain to everyone who has no idea what I'm talking about, what I'm not talking to them about.

I totally understand why people are curious, I'd be curious too. But there's not a single word in my post suggesting I'm talking to anyone but the moderators--who already know what I'm talking about.

"I see what you're doing, and you're not doing it well." That's a message that needs no further explanation to the parties involved.

A public thread is not the place for providing feedback to the mods. There is a nice “contact us” button at the bottom of every forum and thread for that, plus the option to PM the mods directly. It’s rather doubtful any of the mods have even seen this thread. Threads are, by definition, for the community at large. By posting a thread you are implicitly asking the community at large for their input on the topic, which is why there are around a dozen replies to it.

I disagree entirely. Except on this part:

38 minutes ago, Forgottenlore said:

Threads   are, by  definition, for the community at large.   

...which is exactly my point.

Given that the goal from the mods was clearly to pretend that uncomfortable conversations didn't happen here, I fail to see how responding to that privately is the correct course.

To illustrate my concerns with their methods, I should adhere to their methods?

I'm uncertain that any comments I might make on this topic would be found credible. ?

The reason why Storm Troopers wear all white is so that you know they are evil.