Reason for deleting my posts in the 'body breaking down' thread?

[heycal]

Can either a moderator or admin please explain to me why my posts previous to 11:20 pm PST in the "body Breaking down" thread in the health forum were deleted after another poster flamed me? I hope these are 'soft deletes' that you can review, for you will clearly see that my posts in that thread were not inflammatory or abusive, yet I was attacked by another user for no good reason. Now, because of his bad behavior, you delete MY posts?

Given the present state of moderation, and since I can no longer count on any sort of semblance of fairness or predictability in this area, I am now going to flag every post directed at me that violates the TW policies for this forum, most noticably reason number 2, which is often. In the past I overlooked or fought back against such insults aimed at me, but if you are going to delete my non-rule breaking posts along with actual rule-breaking posts, this seems to me at least one remedy I can try on my own to even out the playing field.

I do hope that when I flag a post that violates your user rules, you will delete it, while endeavoring NOT to delete posts of mine or other people's that do not violate the rules.

Thank you.

 

[CanadianChic]

Could you be more of a chick? I suppose the same will apply to your posts then.

 

[CanadianChic]

I apologize SF.....this is me humbly walking away as you grab your magic wand.

 

[heycal]

Could you be more of a chick? I suppose the same will apply to your posts then.

If I am unable to defend myself, I see little choice, my dear CC. If posters are going to blow a stack because they misunderstood an OP and start a flame war over it which causes my legitimate posts to get deleted in the process, I feel some sort of action is in order.

And I'm not too worried about an increase in the number of my posts being deleted. I'm sure a number of them will continue to be deleted for arbitrary and inexplicable reasons, but I don't expect that number to rise because of any stepped up enforcement of the exisiting rules. I may be argumentative and acid tongued on occasion, but I don't engage in a lot of personal attacks or childish name calling or otherwise break the stated TW rules on a regular basis. I try and find a way to make my points without using abusive language. It's really not that hard to do.

 

[CanadianChic]

Also, a note about "reporting posts": I think I have used that feature maybe twice in my life. If I reported every abusive comment or personal insult thrown my way by certain posters here, I'd aggravate my TE by hitting that "report post" button all day long... Most of us aren't going to tattle to the teacher, so I don't know if you can expect forum users to bring most rule violations to your attention. I realize you guys don't see everything, but there is much you DO see, and for the life of me I still can't figure out why you delete certain posts while allowing others to stay.

Apparently much has changed since March 25, 2007. Oh can you see the irony here? Probably not, but I'm sure others may.

 

[heycal]

Apparently much has changed since March 25, 2007. Oh can you see the irony here? Probably not, but I'm sure others may.

Yes, I've given up. That's what's changed. If I'M going to get busted because some other poster starts calling me an A-hole and J-off then clearly up is down and low is high, and I have to re-think my whole philosophy.

It is a sad state affairs indeed. But if the mod game continues to be as weirdly and unpredictably enforced as it has been lately, the next stop for me will be Dedansville.

 

[KingOfTennis]

wats soo bad about ur post being deleted? Its not as if the worlds gonna end.

 

[TW Staff]

Can either a moderator or admin please explain to me why my posts previous to 11:20 pm PST in the "body Breaking down" thread in the health forum were deleted after another poster flamed me? I hope these are 'soft deletes' that you can review, for you will clearly see that my posts in that thread were not inflammatory or abusive, yet I was attacked by another user for no good reason. Now, because of his bad behavior, you delete MY posts?

Given the present state of moderation, and since I can no longer count on any sort of semblance of fairness or predictability in this area, I am now going to flag every post directed at me that violates the TW policies for this forum, most noticably reason number 2, which is often. In the past I overlooked or fought back against such insults aimed at me, but if you are going to delete my non-rule breaking posts along with actual rule-breaking posts, this seems to me at least one remedy I can try on my own to even out the playing field.

I do hope that when I flag a post that violates your user rules, you will delete it, while endeavoring NOT to delete posts of mine or other people's that do not violate the rules.

Thank you.

Heycal,

After reviewing the whole thread (all deleted posts are "soft deletes" and reviewable), what I can clearly see is that you started the flaming with Phil as well as Say Chi Sin Lo from the getgo. Each and every post that was deleted in that thread is justifiable. I'm not quite sure why you're complaining, as from a moderation standpoint, it was handled fair and correctly.

Concerning reported posts:

Just because a post is reported does not mean it automatically gets deleted. It is reviewed and a decision is made to trash it or let is stand.


Spencer, TW.

 

[heycal]

Sorry, but that is ridiculous, Spencer. Please explain how my original post in that thread in any way constitutes a flame against Phil. I did not even address him at all in that post. I merely disagreed, in a non-abusive manner, with his interpration of the OP's health concerns. How can you consider that in any way as initiating a flame war against him? Is honest and civil disagreement now considered a flame simply because another poster responds to that with profanity?

Please go check post #29 in that thread. It basically repeats what I said in my original and now deleted post that you claim was instigating a flame war with Phil. Presumably the reason that remark in post #29 is still standing as of this writing is because it in no way attacks Phil -- just as my original post didn't, either. In both posts, I attempted to clarify the nature of the OP's concerns. The only difference is that he flamed me after the original post, but less so after the new one. Now, why would a difference in his behavior affect how you treat MY posts?

The matter between Say Chi Sin Lo and myself was an honest mistake that was resolved between ourselves within the thread itself, and had nothing to with the Phil matter.

 

[heycal]

Concerning reported posts:

Just because a post is reported does not mean it automatically gets deleted. It is reviewed and a decision is made to trash it or let is stand.


Spencer, TW.

But will you enforce you're own rules in this regard? Namely, that posts that violates your rules be deleted? Most specifically the following sections of your policy (none of which I broke in my original post in that thread, btw). Can I count on you folks to delete posts that are reported to you that violate the following?


"2 No personal attacks or abusive language is allowed.... Antagonistic behavior will not be tolerated.... Debating issues and opinions is fine, but flaming and insulting won’t be tolerated.