Locked Topics: Deleted Topics

[John Dolva]

Kathy: "We are here to debate relevant topics. You need not use this Forum to create absurd threads.

If you have something you wish to discuss, fine. But this is not a topic for discussion. This is a method for you to start trouble.

I am locking it, and requesting that Mr. Simkin delete it. Kathy Beckett"

I request, (and don't expect to have such request taken seriously), that topics may very well be locked, but only after consultation amongst moderators, (at least three), but not deleted.

The topics of whatever nature form part of history. History, in the future, is also a history of disruption and misinformation. Deletion distorts history, which one would have thought is one thing this Forum stands almost alone as a bulwark against.

Recently, a thread, that amongst a huge amount on nonsense, contained numerous positive postings that were educational.The wholesale deletion denies acces to such. Blanket topic deletion if it becomes a norm, that lone moderators consider something wthin their 'job desription', will lead to a diminuition of the Forums credibility.

The joke topic on Egypt is such an obvious joke topic light hearted and also a repository of argument formation that in reading can have educational influence.

'Flooding' with numerous topics all on the same subject is a far more serious issue IMO. It's a tactic seemingly used with panache by people and does nothig to broaden appeal.

Edited June 30, 2007 by John Dolva

[Miles Scull]

We are here to debate relevant topics. You need not use this Forum to create absurd threads.

If you have something you wish to discuss, fine. But this is not a topic for discussion. This is a method for you to start trouble.

I am locking it, and requesting that Mr. Simkin delete it.

Kathy Beckett

I request, (and don't expect to have such request taken seriously), that topics may very well be locked, but only after consultation amongst moderators, (at least three), but not deleted.

The topics of whatever nature form part of history. History, in the future, is also a history of disruption and misinformation. Deletion distorts history, which one would have thought is one thing this Forum stands almost alone as a bulwark against.

Recently, a thread, that amongst a huge amount on nonsense, contained numerous positive postings that were educational.The wholesale deletion denies acces to such. Blanket topic deletion if it becomes a norm, that lone moderators consider something wthin their 'job desription', will lead to a diminuition of the Forums credibility.

The joke topic on Egypt is such an obvious joke topic light hearted and also a repository of argument formation that in reading can have educational influence.

'Flooding' with numerous topics all on the same subject is a far more serious issue IMO. It's a tactic seemingly used with panache by people and does nothig to broaden appeal.

Thank you, John, I had absolutely NO intention of deleting it. It was locked and the decision for deletion was left to Mr. Simkin.

And yes, had that been the only thread on the same subject, I would not have done so. As you had said, the same subject was occurring in many threads. That was what I had based my decision on.

I also want you to know that threads can be as easily unlocked..

It is sometimes difficult to get a consensus from the moderators because of time differences.

I feel it best, in thoses cases, to leave any ultimate decisions to John.

Thanks, again.

Kathy Beckett

This mod seems to be earnest in carefully & closely following the various threads here on the forum as they spring into existence, flourish & eventually die out. It's comforting to know that the cop is on the beat, so to speak. But when does a cop go bad & turn into a direction of going beyond the checks & balances prescribed by his code of conduct?

It would be best that an individual mod WAIT before locking a thread until a consensus of three mods is obtained. Otherwise, mistakes of needless repression can arise, and the question arises also: does the mod have a tendency to act unilaterally without the cooperation, advice & consent of his fellow mods.

WAIT, CONSULT & then lock 'em up!

[John Dolva]

Kathy Beckett: "I am locking it, and requesting that Mr. Simkin delete it."

I request, (and don't expect to have such request taken seriously), that topics may very well be locked, but only after consultation amongst moderators, (at least three), but not deleted.

The topics of whatever nature form part of history.

History is also a history of disruption and misinformation. Deletion distorts history, which one would have thought is one thing this Forum stands almost alone as a bulwark against.

Recently, a thread was deleted sans warning or explanation, that amongst a huge amount of nonsense, contained numerous positive postings that were educational.

The wholesale deletion denies access to such.

Blanket topic deletion if it becomes a norm, that lone moderators consider something wthin their 'job desription' (even requestiing such, without broad consultation), will lead to a diminuition of the Forums credibility.

Kathy: "Thank you, John, I had absolutely NO intention of deleting it. It was locked and the decision for deletion was left to Mr. Simkin..I also want you to know that threads can be as easily unlocked.."

Indeed. - Un-deleting is quite another matter.

"It is sometimes difficult to get a consensus from the moderators because of time differences".

Tough.

But as a norm, it is a guard against "Unwarrranted Abuse of Power and Influence by the 'Forum Moderators Complex'."

"Thanks, again. Kathy Beckett."

No worries, you're welcome.

EDIT:: Well put Miles. With you 100% there.

Edited June 30, 2007 by John Dolva

[Terry Mauro]

Kathy Beckett: "I am locking it, and requesting that Mr. Simkin delete it."

I request, (and don't expect to have such request taken seriously), that topics may very well be locked, but only after consultation amongst moderators, (at least three), but not deleted.

The topics of whatever nature form part of history.

History is also a history of disruption and misinformation. Deletion distorts history, which one would have thought is one thing this Forum stands almost alone as a bulwark against.

Recently, a thread was deleted sans warning or explanation, that amongst a huge amount of nonsense, contained numerous positive postings that were educational.

The wholesale deletion denies access to such.

Blanket topic deletion if it becomes a norm, that lone moderators consider something wthin their 'job desription' (even requestiing such, without broad consultation), will lead to a diminuition of the Forums credibility.

Kathy: "Thank you, John, I had absolutely NO intention of deleting it. It was locked and the decision for deletion was left to Mr. Simkin..I also want you to know that threads can be as easily unlocked.."

Indeed. - Un-deleting is quite another matter.

"It is sometimes difficult to get a consensus from the moderators because of time differences".

Tough.

But as a norm, it is a guard against "Unwarrranted Abuse of Power and Influence by the 'Forum Moderators Complex'."

"Thanks, again. Kathy Beckett."

No worries, you're welcome.

EDIT:: Well put Miles. With you 100% there.

*************************************************************

"The topics of whatever nature form part of history.

History is also a history of disruption and misinformation. Deletion distorts history, which one would have thought is one thing this Forum stands almost alone as a bulwark against."

I believe that the "history" you speak of should be saved, locked, and set aside in a section specifically created for the purpose of documenting the number of incidences, and on what basis this type of disruption and dissemination of misinfo/disinfo, may be happening. This could serve as a record for keeping track of the distributors, their names, IP addresses, etc., as well as the time of occurrence, by whom, and what trigger factors might have been involved to provoke it. This would enable the admins and the moderators to ascertain what, if any, distinctive patterns might be involved, or at work, here.

In any event, it could be utilized as a method of trouble-shooting, or defusing future instances of this type of behavior. This is merely a suggestion on how one might be able to manage or monitor the forum more effectively. The issue of a consensus among the moderators is a good idea, and could form the basis for a more cohesive, unified effort on their part.

Edited June 30, 2007 by Terry Mauro

[Cliff Varnell]

And yes, had that been the only thread on the same subject, I would not have done so. As you had said, the same subject was occurring in many threads. That was what I had based my decision on.

Kathy, just for future reference you might note that the reason this

topic was occurring in many threads was because T. Folsom was on

the run.

He asked 11 questions and had them stuffed down his throat.

He was looking for an "out," anyway.

[Miles Scull]

Kathy Beckett: "I am locking it, and requesting that Mr. Simkin delete it."

I request, (and don't expect to have such request taken seriously), that topics may very well be locked, but only after consultation amongst moderators, (at least three), but not deleted.

The topics of whatever nature form part of history.

History is also a history of disruption and misinformation. Deletion distorts history, which one would have thought is one thing this Forum stands almost alone as a bulwark against.

Recently, a thread was deleted sans warning or explanation, that amongst a huge amount of nonsense, contained numerous positive postings that were educational.

The wholesale deletion denies access to such.

Blanket topic deletion if it becomes a norm, that lone moderators consider something wthin their 'job desription' (even requestiing such, without broad consultation), will lead to a diminuition of the Forums credibility.

Kathy: "Thank you, John, I had absolutely NO intention of deleting it. It was locked and the decision for deletion was left to Mr. Simkin..I also want you to know that threads can be as easily unlocked.."

Indeed. - Un-deleting is quite another matter.

"It is sometimes difficult to get a consensus from the moderators because of time differences".

Tough.

But as a norm, it is a guard against "Unwarrranted Abuse of Power and Influence by the 'Forum Moderators Complex'."

"Thanks, again. Kathy Beckett."

No worries, you're welcome.

EDIT:: Well put Miles. With you 100% there.

*************************************************************

"The topics of whatever nature form part of history.

History is also a history of disruption and misinformation. Deletion distorts history, which one would have thought is one thing this Forum stands almost alone as a bulwark against."

I believe that the "history" you speak of should be saved, locked, and set aside in a section specifically created for the purpose of documenting the number of incidences, and on what basis this type of disruption and dissemination of misinfo/disinfo, may be happening. This could serve as a record for keeping track of the distributors, their names, IP addresses, etc., as well as the time of occurrence, by whom, and what trigger factors might have been involved to provoke it. This would enable the admins and the moderators to ascertain what, if any, distinctive patterns might be involved, or at work, here.

In any event, it could be utilized as a method of trouble-shooting, or defusing future instances of this type of behavior.

Hear, Oh Hear!

Yes, anything to rationalize the mod system & thus, the forum discourse. Couldn't agree more.

[Charles Drago]

"I believe that the 'history' you speak of should be saved, locked, and set aside in a section specifically created for the purpose of documenting the number of incidences, and on what basis this type of disruption and dissemination of misinfo/disinfo, may be happening. This could serve as a record for keeping track of the distributors, their names, IP addresses, etc., as well as the time of occurrence, by whom, and what trigger factors might have been involved to provoke it. This would enable the admins and the moderators to ascertain what, if any, distinctive patterns might be involved, or at work, here.

"In any event, it could be utilized as a method of trouble-shooting, or defusing future instances of this type of behavior."

Bravo!

This is precisely the way that we, in aikido-like fashion, turn the enemy's energy against its source.

There is so much to learn from them. But there are many hidden dangers along this route.

That this T. Folsom character represents -- wittingly or otherwise -- the enemy is beyond question. Let's enjoy all that he/she/they hand(s) us.

Charles

Edited June 30, 2007 by Charles Drago

[Terry Mauro]

"I believe that the 'history' you speak of should be saved, locked, and set aside in a section specifically created for the purpose of documenting the number of incidences, and on what basis this type of disruption and dissemination of misinfo/disinfo, may be happening. This could serve as a record for keeping track of the distributors, their names, IP addresses, etc., as well as the time of occurrence, by whom, and what trigger factors might have been involved to provoke it. This would enable the admins and the moderators to ascertain what, if any, distinctive patterns might be involved, or at work, here.

"In any event, it could be utilized as a method of trouble-shooting, or defusing future instances of this type of behavior."

Bravo!

This is precisely the way that we, in aikido-like fashion, turn the enemy's energy against its source.

There is so much to learn from them. But there are many hidden dangers along this route.

That this T. Folsom character represents -- wittingly or otherwise -- the enemy is beyond question. Let's enjoy all that he/she/they hand(s) us.

Charles

*****************************************************

"Bravo!

This is precisely the way that we, in aikido-like fashion, turn the enemy's energy against its source."

The practice of Haikido, Hapkido, and more recently, Tai Chi, have aided my focus over the years, C.D.

Thanks for noting the analogy.

Don't get mad, get even. This is what is known as the true "art" of war, in the Asian sense of the word.

Ter

[Charles Black]

In that I have participated in "very few" internet forums, I am somewhat at a loss regarding the verbage.

Is the difference between "locking" a topic and "deleting" a topic in any way comparable to the difference between "banning" books and "Burning" books?

I did not follow the topic in question so I really have no involvement in other than what I consider "acceptable procedure".

Is there a list of topics that are banned? Where is it located ? How would one be allowed for example to ban my ideas and yet say that I am still a forum citizen? I feel that deletion of written material, is not at all unlike burning it, and is a quite serious affront to ones "human" rights.

Self deleting a topic as a result of the use of or the threat of the use of force by another party, seems to root itself in the dark ages. I can understand censorship of what may generally be accepted as foul language, to protect members of the forum who have the "right" to not be subjected to this.

In my opinion, deletion of a topic is not that different than deletion of an individual. If a person is not basically the sum of his thoughts and beliefs....what then is he ?

I realize that this forum does not masquerade as a "democracy", but judges here (the moderators), who have never been accepted as qualified by those whom they are moderating, seems unlike any organization, other than the Army, with which I have ever been associated. Even clubs and fraternal organizations have the privilege of choosing someone such as a "seargent of arms" who is acceptable to at least the majority.

As I said earlier, I have no knowledge of the topic in question or even care to.

I am strongly opposed to censorship based only on the popularity or acceptance of a given opinion, which is based solely on another's given opinion.

How is this form of "moderation" kept from becoming censorship of ideas....who has the right to censor my or anyones ideas? The "proprietor" of this forum has the right to accept or reject members, But the rejection of a MEMBERS ideas, yet allowing someone to remain a member, is a travesty. It is telling someone that you can be a member of my debating team, but you will not be allowed to speak !

In my dictionary, moderation is not synonymous with coerced control!

Who needs this type of abuse while engaging in a function that is supposed to be both pleasureable and stimulating ?

Either I have completely missed the boat, or this is an definite attempt to supress the expression of personal thought. National Security secrets are not being exposed. Only thoughts that the societies from which we all derive deem acceptable, are in question here ! WHY ?

I am not preaching "Anarchy"....but I see no way that the terms moderator and supressor can in any way be linked.

What did that crazy colonial rebel say appx. 230 years ago? Something about "Give me liberty or...."?

Charles Black

[Terry Mauro]

In that I have participated in "very few" internet forums, I am somewhat at a loss regarding the verbage.

Is the difference between "locking" a topic and "deleting" a topic in any way comparable to the difference between "banning" books and "Burning" books?

I did not follow the topic in question so I really have no involvement in other than what I consider "acceptable procedure".

Is there a list of topics that are banned? Where is it located ? How would one be allowed for example to ban my ideas and yet say that I am still a forum citizen? I feel that deletion of written material, is not at all unlike burning it, and is a quite serious affront to ones "human" rights.

Self deleting a topic as a result of the use of or the threat of the use of force by another party, seems to root itself in the dark ages. I can understand censorship of what may generally be accepted as foul language, to protect members of the forum who have the "right" to not be subjected to this.

In my opinion, deletion of a topic is not that different than deletion of an individual. If a person is not basically the sum of his thoughts and beliefs....what then is he ?

I realize that this forum does not masquerade as a "democracy", but judges here (the moderators), who have never been accepted as qualified by those whom they are moderating, seems unlike any organization, other than the Army, with which I have ever been associated. Even clubs and fraternal organizations have the privilege of choosing someone such as a "seargent of arms" who is acceptable to at least the majority.

As I said earlier, I have no knowledge of the topic in question or even care to.

I am strongly opposed to censorship based only on the popularity or acceptance of a given opinion, which is based solely on another's given opinion.

How is this form of "moderation" kept from becoming censorship of ideas....who has the right to censor my or anyones ideas? The "proprietor" of this forum has the right to accept or reject members, But the rejection of a MEMBERS ideas, yet allowing someone to remain a member, is a travesty. It is telling someone that you can be a member of my debating team, but you will not be allowed to speak !

In my dictionary, moderation is not synonymous with coerced control!

Who needs this type of abuse while engaging in a function that is supposed to be both pleasureable and stimulating ?

Either I have completely missed the boat, or this is an definite attempt to supress the expression of personal thought. National Security secrets are not being exposed. Only thoughts that the societies from which we all derive deem acceptable, are in question here ! WHY ?

I am not preaching "Anarchy"....but I see no way that the terms moderator and supressor can in any way be linked.

What did that crazy colonial rebel say appx. 230 years ago? Something about "Give me liberty or...."?

Charles Black

************************************************************

"What did that crazy colonial rebel say appx. 230 years ago? Something about "Give me liberty or...."?"

"...or give me a locked topic that I'm still able to view, and after having reviewed the content of the thread, can draw my own conclusions as to why it was, in effect, subjected to "locked" status in the first place."

You might then be given a choice of addressing it with all of the moderators, or those who took part in the consensus of making the decision to lock it. You could then state your case as to the merits of re-opening the topic, and why you believe you might possibly have some constructive information to offer or impart, as a way of keeping it on track, above the level of flame-war status, and could possibly guarantee it not be allowed to degenerate to the level of contention that warranted its being relegated to "locked" status.

You might even be able to view the "locked" status of a topic as a sort of "chill out" period, or what is it that parents require of their squabbling children, instead of having to slap the hell out of them, "T," for TIME OUT? A helluva lot of good that would have done my old lady. We never would've even heard her had it not been for the flying slippers, dish-rags, and assorted items that could never really have caused damage to the house itself, per se, but sure in hell stung when it hit its target. Got our attention REAL fast.

[Bill Miller]

"I believe that the 'history' you speak of should be saved, locked, and set aside in a section specifically created for the purpose of documenting the number of incidences, and on what basis this type of disruption and dissemination of misinfo/disinfo, may be happening. This could serve as a record for keeping track of the distributors, their names, IP addresses, etc., as well as the time of occurrence, by whom, and what trigger factors might have been involved to provoke it. This would enable the admins and the moderators to ascertain what, if any, distinctive patterns might be involved, or at work, here.

"In any event, it could be utilized as a method of trouble-shooting, or defusing future instances of this type of behavior."

Bravo!

This is precisely the way that we, in aikido-like fashion, turn the enemy's energy against its source.

There is so much to learn from them. But there are many hidden dangers along this route.

That this T. Folsom character represents -- wittingly or otherwise -- the enemy is beyond question. Let's enjoy all that he/she/they hand(s) us.

Charles

I could not agree more with Charles. In fact, what he said is quite wise IMO. The thread is already archived, unless deleted. But even if it was deleted from the public forum ... it should still be logged elsewhere. Personally, I do not what anyone could complain about when talking about certain threads. If it was a view on the evidence of the JFK assassination whereas data was being kept from the public by deleting such post/ threads, then that would be wrong. On the other hand, if these are threads that don't address the assassination and are designed to complain and bitch about things that are assumed and/or presumed that has no relevancy to the educating people on the assassination of JFK, then they are not threads that this forum should have to buy web space for .... so to speak.

Bill

[Bernice Moore]

Hi All:

Agreed on no censorship.......then on the other hand, the Mods will be damned if they do, and damned if they don't.....Which has already occurred.....terrible job being a Mod..

one of the most unthankful......The members on any Forum, who take such responsibility are far and few.....So give them a break also..

What I have seen so far has been well thought out, imo......before any action has been taken, and also the final decision is always left to the Administration...

What if, the offending post was deleted, if not relevant or was simply a bitchy type or personal attack type post....?? and not subject related in any way.....just a thought....but then there are those who will also say that is history also, so it is between a rock and a hard place....

Thanks B......

Edited July 1, 2007 by Bernice Moore

[Terry Mauro]

"I believe that the 'history' you speak of should be saved, locked, and set aside in a section specifically created for the purpose of documenting the number of incidences, and on what basis this type of disruption and dissemination of misinfo/disinfo, may be happening. This could serve as a record for keeping track of the distributors, their names, IP addresses, etc., as well as the time of occurrence, by whom, and what trigger factors might have been involved to provoke it. This would enable the admins and the moderators to ascertain what, if any, distinctive patterns might be involved, or at work, here.

"In any event, it could be utilized as a method of trouble-shooting, or defusing future instances of this type of behavior."

Bravo!

This is precisely the way that we, in aikido-like fashion, turn the enemy's energy against its source.

There is so much to learn from them. But there are many hidden dangers along this route.

That this T. Folsom character represents -- wittingly or otherwise -- the enemy is beyond question. Let's enjoy all that he/she/they hand(s) us.

Charles

I could not agree more with Charles. In fact, what he said is quite wise IMO. The thread is already archived, unless deleted. But even if it was deleted from the public forum ... it should still be logged elsewhere. Personally, I do not what anyone could complain about when talking about certain threads. If it was a view on the evidence of the JFK assassination whereas data was being kept from the public by deleting such post/ threads, then that would be wrong. On the other hand, if these are threads that don't address the assassination and are designed to complain and bitch about things that are assumed and/or presumed that has no relevancy to the educating people on the assassination of JFK, then they are not threads that this forum should have to buy web space for .... so to speak.

Bill

***********************************************************

Those were my words C.D. was commenting on. We have a way of complementing one another's philosophy on life, and the world of assassination, in general. I consider Charles Drago a kindred spirit, indeed. FWIW, I was replying to John Dolva:

*************************************************************

"The topics of whatever nature form part of history.

History is also a history of disruption and misinformation. Deletion distorts history, which one would have thought is one thing this Forum stands almost alone as a bulwark against."

I believe that the "history" you speak of should be saved, locked, and set aside in a section specifically created for the purpose of documenting the number of incidences, and on what basis this type of disruption and dissemination of misinfo/disinfo, may be happening. This could serve as a record for keeping track of the distributors, their names, IP addresses, etc., as well as the time of occurrence, by whom, and what trigger factors might have been involved to provoke it. This would enable the admins and the moderators to ascertain what, if any, distinctive patterns might be involved, or at work, here.

In any event, it could be utilized as a method of trouble-shooting, or defusing future instances of this type of behavior. This is merely a suggestion on how one might be able to manage or monitor the forum more effectively. The issue of a consensus among the moderators is a good idea, and could form the basis for a more cohesive, unified effort on their part.

Bravo!

This is precisely the way that we, in aikido-like fashion, turn the enemy's energy against its source.

There is so much to learn from them. But there are many hidden dangers along this route.

That this T. Folsom character represents -- wittingly or otherwise -- the enemy is beyond question. Let's enjoy all that he/she/they hand(s) us.

Charles

Ter

[Bernice Moore]

Hi All:

Agreed on no censorship.......then on the other hand, the Mods will be damned if they do, and damned if they don't.....Which has already occurred.....terrible job being a Mod..

one of the most unthankful......The members on any Forum, who take such responsibility are far and few.....So give them a break also..

What I have seen so far has been well thought out, imo......before any action has been taken, and also the final decision is always left to the Administration...

What if, the offending post was deleted, if not relevant or was simply a bitchy type or personal attack type post....?? and not subject related in any way.....just a thought....but then there are those who will also say that is history also, so it is between a rock and a hard place....

Thanks B......

Bernice,

These are for you!!!!

Thanks!!!

Kathy

*****

Wasn't looking for anything let alone flowers, but thank you.........

.....Just reaching for a little thought provoking common sense....more than one way

to look at any subject...

Thanks B...

Edited July 1, 2007 by Bernice Moore

[Terry Mauro]

Hi All:

Agreed on no censorship.......then on the other hand, the Mods will be damned if they do, and damned if they don't.....Which has already occurred.....terrible job being a Mod..

one of the most unthankful......The members on any Forum, who take such responsibility are far and few.....So give them a break also..

What I have seen so far has been well thought out, imo......before any action has been taken, and also the final decision is always left to the Administration...

What if, the offending post was deleted, if not relevant or was simply a bitchy type or personal attack type post....?? and not subject related in any way.....just a thought....but then there are those who will also say that is history also, so it is between a rock and a hard place....

Thanks B......

********************************************************

"What if, the offending post was deleted, if not relevant or was simply a bitchy type or personal attack type post....?? and not subject related in any way.....just a thought...."

Well, hell yeah, Bean! Those are considered to be ad hominem attacks, and should be deleted for lack of relevant content. Good point, Bunky!