So I noticed you can't delete your own threads now

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 1:05 PM GMT
    why?

    If RJ admins can delete a thread then why can't the thread starter?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 1:34 PM GMT
    There have been a few threads on this. While some disagree, I think the general consensus is one member should be able to delete his own message, but not messages of others. He can't delete his original message in a thread because the thread is anchored to the message, but he can delete the text.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 1:59 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidThere have been a few threads on this. While some disagree, I think the general consensus is one member should be able to delete his own message, but not messages of others. He can't delete his original message in a thread because the thread is anchored to the message, but he can delete the text.



    How and when was this consensus reached? I don't recall an actual poll.

    A few people with their hair up over something is always more vocal than the larger proportion of posters who were not that worked up about it. Perhaps the majority did not foresee admin bowing to an agitated few on one thread and simply felt it indelicate to suggest they might have been taking their posts a bit too seriously.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 3:39 PM GMT
    Put the Delete Thread capability back!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 3:48 PM GMT
    I'm glad that entire threads can't be deleted by any single poster anymore.

    If somebody posts something that they later regret, then they can delete their own crap, and theirs only, thereby curtailing the gratuitious power to erase the contributions of others.

    Another step forwards towards lesser arbitrary and unbridled censorsip...yip yip =]
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 3:52 PM GMT
    _Sage_ saidAnother step forwards towards lesser arbitrary and unbridled censorsip...yip yip =]

    a giant leap for thread jacking!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 4:01 PM GMT
    Caslon17000 said
    _Sage_ saidAnother step forwards towards lesser arbitrary and unbridled censorsip...yip yip =]

    a giant leap for thread jacking!



    The beauty of a thread is that is is organic.

    Sometimes something great will grow, sometimes something hilarious, sometimes something boring, irrelevant, absurd or offensive. If somebody doesn't like the way a particular thread is going: one can always throw their two-cents in and attempt to steer the course..... If they fail, tough titty icon_cool.gif
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19136

    Jan 28, 2011 4:08 PM GMT
    Maybe they should at least give the thread starter the ability to LOCK the thread so no one else can post in it. That would at least preserve the thread that many members had participated in. I agree that it's annoying when a thread started deletes a thread, but I don't exactly lose any sleep over it if/when they do.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 4:12 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidMaybe they should at least give the thread starter the ability to LOCK the thread so no one else can post in it. That would at least preserve the thread that many members had participated in. I agree that it's annoying when a thread started deletes a thread, but I don't exactly lose any sleep over it if/when they do.


    Why the power to lock a thread though? Surely all a user has to do is scroll up the previous posts if they do not personally like newer contributions to a thread.

    Furhter contributions from other posters, no matter their content, do not mitigate previous posts.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 4:27 PM GMT
    Tough call, and I see good arguments on both sides. I've certainly been glad I could delete my OP when I realized it contained serious errors, or I misunderstood something, or for some reason it was rendered unnecessary & obsolete.

    On the other hand, I've also been ticked when I posted things to someone else's thread, only to see the whole thing deleted. I've even had a post disappear while I was writing my reply, only to get an error message when I went to submit it. Most annoying!

    So I dunno, I suppose on balance I'd rather not see threads entirely deleted without explanation, but I think it should be possible at times to do so, perhaps with the concurrence of RJ Admin.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 5:45 PM GMT
    I find it astonishing that Americans, who drone on about their free speech at EVERY opportunity, should find it acceptable for an OP to delete maybe 100 other posts by other people and thereby silence them.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 6:09 PM GMT
    Lostboy saidI find it astonishing that Americans, who drone on about their free speech at EVERY opportunity, should find it acceptable for an OP to delete maybe 100 other posts by other people and thereby silence them.


    There's a difference between Freedom of Speech and hijacking a thread so that it disrupts the discussion. For example, UC couldn't ask a simple question without the threading being immediately hijacked.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 6:15 PM GMT
    Caslon17000 said
    Lostboy saidI find it astonishing that Americans, who drone on about their free speech at EVERY opportunity, should find it acceptable for an OP to delete maybe 100 other posts by other people and thereby silence them.


    There's a difference between Freedom of Speech and hijacking a thread so that it disrupts the discussion. For example, UC couldn't ask a simple question without the threading being immediately hijacked.



    Nobody can hi-jack a thread unless other people give them power to do so.

    Somebody who de-rails from the threads intended purpose can be ignored completely by others wishing to carry on the original discussion, should they choose to.



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 6:21 PM GMT
    Lostboy saidI find it astonishing that Americans, who drone on about their free speech at EVERY opportunity, should find it acceptable for an OP to delete maybe 100 other posts by other people and thereby silence them.



    Free speech is a one of our unalienable Constitutional rights ...

    However, many Americans accept a standard that speech on a privately owned forum or on private property is not guaranteed; that is to say, owners of a forum or venue have every right to exercise editorial and other rights for the conduct of guests on their property, both real and intellectual.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 6:25 PM GMT
    alphatrigger said
    Lostboy saidI find it astonishing that Americans, who drone on about their free speech at EVERY opportunity, should find it acceptable for an OP to delete maybe 100 other posts by other people and thereby silence them.



    Free speech is a one of our unalienable Constitutional rights ....


    there you go again.....


    icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 6:26 PM GMT
    Im sure this will make a few on here don their wigs and do a happy dance while singing Victory is Mine....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 6:30 PM GMT
    _Sage_ said
    Caslon17000 said
    Lostboy saidI find it astonishing that Americans, who drone on about their free speech at EVERY opportunity, should find it acceptable for an OP to delete maybe 100 other posts by other people and thereby silence them.


    There's a difference between Freedom of Speech and hijacking a thread so that it disrupts the discussion. For example, UC couldn't ask a simple question without the threading being immediately hijacked.



    Nobody can hi-jack a thread unless other people give them power to do so.

    Somebody who de-rails from the threads intended purpose can be ignored completely by others wishing to carry on the original discussion, should they choose to.




    You're a fucking idiot, who couldn't find his ass with both hands and a flashlight!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 6:35 PM GMT
    Caslon17000 said
    _Sage_ said
    Caslon17000 said
    Lostboy saidI find it astonishing that Americans, who drone on about their free speech at EVERY opportunity, should find it acceptable for an OP to delete maybe 100 other posts by other people and thereby silence them.


    There's a difference between Freedom of Speech and hijacking a thread so that it disrupts the discussion. For example, UC couldn't ask a simple question without the threading being immediately hijacked.



    Nobody can hi-jack a thread unless other people give them power to do so.

    Somebody who de-rails from the threads intended purpose can be ignored completely by others wishing to carry on the original discussion, should they choose to.




    You're a fucking idiot, who couldn't find his ass with both hands and a flashlight!


    loool this would be an example of somebody hi-jacking a thread. Something you are sooooooo opposed to right? So should the thread now be deleted?! I didn't think so ...;p

    Tut tut, seems like the idiocy is coming from somehwere else old timer.....icon_rolleyes.gif

    If you are able to reply to my point regarding the subject matter, i'll gladly respond =]

    (FFS what is it with people on here today, PMS much?)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 6:38 PM GMT
    yourname2000 said
    Caslon17000 said
    _Sage_ said
    Caslon17000 said
    Lostboy saidI find it astonishing that Americans, who drone on about their free speech at EVERY opportunity, should find it acceptable for an OP to delete maybe 100 other posts by other people and thereby silence them.


    There's a difference between Freedom of Speech and hijacking a thread so that it disrupts the discussion. For example, UC couldn't ask a simple question without the threading being immediately hijacked.



    Nobody can hi-jack a thread unless other people give them power to do so.

    Somebody who de-rails from the threads intended purpose can be ignored completely by others wishing to carry on the original discussion, should they choose to.




    You're a fucking idiot, who couldn't find his ass with both hands and a flashlight!

    Pot: meet kettle. And you're the fucking king of hijacking threads, Dave....wanna start throwing bloody seals in this thread like the spoilt child you are? Come on...I know ya wanna.

    See how easy it is to hijack a thread. One incinderary comment and away it goes.

    Thanks, yourname2000, for helping me demonstrate my point. ... icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 6:39 PM GMT
    People still read caslon´s offerings? How charitable of them. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 6:46 PM GMT
    Lostboy saidPeople still read caslon´s offerings? How charitable of them. icon_rolleyes.gif

    And then another one chimes in and, voilà, the original thread is left in the dust.

    This is why the OP should be able to delete a thread.

    QED


    BTW, you guys are way too easy to play. Srsly. ....and I didn't even have to use a pic of a baby seal. .... icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 6:48 PM GMT
    Caslon17000 said
    Lostboy saidPeople still read caslon´s offerings? How charitable of them. icon_rolleyes.gif

    And then another one chimes in and, voilà, the original thread is left in the dust.

    This is why the OP should be able to delete a thread.

    QED


    you were supposed to say checkmateicon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 6:52 PM GMT
    Caslon17000 said
    Lostboy saidPeople still read caslon´s offerings? How charitable of them. icon_rolleyes.gif

    And then another one chimes in and, voilà, the original thread is left in the dust.

    This is why the OP should be able to delete a thread.

    QED





    And then somebody simply does this:


    '' Caslon, back to the point in hand: why you feel that your freedom to say what you please (within the site rules) on the forums should be curtailed/deleted by somebody simply because they feel like it?

    Do you not give grown adults enough credence to be able to respond/retaliate/challenge back to the subject/ignore thread hi-jackers as they so choose, and carry on any conversation intended despite the imput from certain others? Why is that?
    ''

    ^ And then the thread has gotton back on track. If it stays on track, who knows...That is the beauty of communal input.
    =]



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 7:34 PM GMT
    Last week you guys were bitching about people deleting their threads. This week you are bitching about not being able to delete your threads..

    You must all be on the same cycle icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 10:15 PM GMT
    yourname2000 said
    Lostboy saidPeople still read caslon´s offerings? How charitable of them. icon_rolleyes.gif

    Yeah, I'm late to ignoring him....I've been ignoring more of the blowhards on RJ and it's been wonderful to my state of mind. It's just all piss and vinegar with that guy...can't remember the last time I've read anything helpful, supportive or redeeming from him. Anyway, just a few years and he's worm-food...he can argue with the devil about how perfect and smart he is.


    I f-ing rofl'd my black arse off reading this... (salutes for the unexpected release of endorphins)