# Deleted threads



## duckie

What's up with the policy of deleting threads left and right in these forums? I understand they're heavily moderated, but it makes little sense to delete entire threads when they can simply be closed.

Sure, troll threads and ads, but legitimate question threads are deleted as well. Sometimes it seems like the mods have some kind of deletion quoate to fill, so they pick more or less random targets for their purpose.

Suggestion: stop deleting threads that are not outright spam. Just close them if you think they're off topic.


----------



## cuchuflete

duckie,

It's very difficult to respond to an insulting diatribe that is so thoroughly free of facts.


What's up with vague assertions?

What's up with absurd accusations of deletion quotas?


If you wish to write something factual, a bit less of a peeved rant, I'd be happy to reply to whatever specifics you might offer.  

cuchuflete




duckie said:


> What's up with the policy of deleting threads left and right in these forums? I understand they're heavily moderated, but it makes little sense to delete entire threads when they can simply be closed.
> 
> Sure, troll threads and ads, but legitimate question threads are deleted as well. Sometimes it seems like the mods have some kind of deletion quoate to fill, so they pick more or less random targets for their purpose.
> 
> Suggestion: stop deleting threads that are not outright spam. Just close them if you think they're off topic.


----------



## duckie

Lol! It's pretty hard to point to 'facts' when the threads are deleted!

It's insulting that I find it annoying that threads with valid questions are being deleted? Nice.


----------



## Jana337

Your thread was deleted because it was a research question, not a language one. I.e. not valid, I'd say. 

Jana


----------



## cuchuflete

I haven't come across too many people who don't call their own threads "worthy and valid" when those threads are deleted.

Here are a few facts to chew on:

1.  Many people do not read forum rules and guidelines, which give a clear indication of what is within the scope of the language forums and sub-forums.

2. Many people ignore the sticky thread in the Cultural Discussions forum, despite its title:  READ BEFORE POSTING.

3. Yesterday I deleted three threads from CD.  One is under review by the mods for that forum, and may or may not be restored.  They generally try to help thread starters re-state a question so that it will fit the scope of the forum, rather than just removing threads.  The other removed threads were research questions and requests for personal advice.
Among the three threads, there had been only two replies. 
There was no flaming or spam or trollish behaviour involved, just topics well outside the scope of these forums.

Suppose we were to close such threads and leave the out-of-scope questions and early answers visible?  How would that add value to these forums?   Yes, it might evoke a PM answer or two to the thread starter, and encourage more people to post more inappropriate thread topics.  Soon the menu pages would be nicely packed with closed threads.



> ...legitimate question threads are deleted as well.


  That is a matter of the writer's personal opinion.  Many "legitimate" questions do not belong in these forums.  That's no denigration of their legitimacy or personal value to the thread starter.  They just don't fit here.


----------



## duckie

Jana337 said:


> Your thread was deleted because it was a research question, not a language one. I.e. not valid, I'd say.
> 
> Jana



How is it 'research' to ask people to transcribe audio? For the record, I have seen another such thread ('please tell me what is being said in this audio clip') running to its completion with excellent help without any problems - in the same forum I posted in. A win-win situation for all involved.

And even if you somehow think it's against forum rules to ask for help with an audio file, I was simply asking why you _delete_ these threads instead of simply closing them?

It's so much more courteous to close a thread than it is to delete one. If you close it everyone can see what it contains and find it if they need to. When you delete threads they just disappear and you have no idea what was being said and who replied to you in-between visits to the forum. You're simpy stomping on the time and effort people put into replying to threads. I find it incredibly rude.

cuchuflete, see above. And I have read forum rules, not to worry. I've also seen quite a few threads being deleted that were not in any way 'spammy' or advertisement, they were honest questions and helpful answers.

If you moderators wish to uphold a friendly forum where people wish to put in the time and effort to learn from one another I once again _strongly_ recommend that you cease your mania with deleting threads. Just close them if you think they are off topic. Deletion should be preserved for actual troll and advertisement threads.


----------



## Nunty

Oh dear. Calmly, children, calmly.

Duckie, there are excellent questions that are not spam or obscene or trolling or whatever... but are simply not appropriate for this forum. For example. I am learning a new technique of making lace. If I were to post in CD "What is the best method of overlapping cloth stitch in Pizzo di Cantù", the thread would rightly be deleted because this is a language forum, not a lace forum. The question is legitimate, and I know there is at least one forum member who would be able to advise me  but it is not an appropriate question for this venue.

This is a wonderful and friendly _language_ forum. I have seen one or two judgement calls that I may not agree with, but I have not seen anything as arbitrary as what you are claiming... without examples, without even saying "Well, it was a thread about X." 

I'm sorry your thread was deleted, Duckie, but there are ways of presenting a question or an argument that get results. Vague and insulting rants are not among the most effective of these.


----------



## TrentinaNE

duckie said:


> Sometimes it seems like the mods have some kind of deletion quoate to fill, so they pick more or less random targets for their purpose.


I must be due for a lashing because I don't think I've fulfilled my "quota" in quite some time.  

Elisabetta


----------



## ElaineG

Among other things, duckie, a transcription of an TV clip, which in itself is illegally posted on a video hosting site, would violate copyright laws and expose WR to liability that would fall on the site's owner.


----------



## geve

Bonjour, hello, hola... 

I don't mean to pour oil on fire, and I too think that non-violent communication is more efficient... but I've been asking myself a similar question. 

I can think of two specific examples of threads in CD, where I wasn't able to figure out why they were deleted. Since they were deleted the hard way, there was no convenient note from the mod that would have explained it ("I deleted it because I hate you muahahaha" or something alike )

There was a thread about the World Jump Day; and one on chain letters. There had been a few replies to both threads, the one on the WJD had even been running for a couple of days, and really I don't see how they didn't fit here.
Maybe these threads were of little interest, it is your call to judge. But why weren't they closed (in which case generally one of you leaves a closing post for everyone to see), or even deleted (the "soft" way, ie. leaving a note with the reason for deletion)? 
What's the difference between those threads and those that are simply closed? 
How do we know what was so wrong with them that they deserved to vanish from the forums in a kind of "this-thread-never-existed-you-can't-prove-it-you-must-have-dreamt-it" way? (here come the men in black... )


----------



## maxiogee

Is this Duck Season?

I predict a dead duckie soon!


----------



## cuchuflete

maxiogee said:


> Is this Duck Season?
> 
> I predict a dead duckie soon!



Don't make too much of it, Tony.  A little quacking is not a capital offense.  

Back to practicing random mania,
cuchu


----------



## duckie

Nun-Translator - my thread was a language thread posted in the proper language forum. It was not at all off topic in that context, and I have seen a similar thread having excellent helpful output in that forum previously. I don't see what is 'vague' about my post - I cannot possibly link to the threads that are deleted for a good reason. I'm simply pointing out that it's rude to delete threads that have replies when said threads could simply be *closed*. The difference between closing a thread and deleting it is the difference between stomping on someone's efforts and just letting it be known that it's outside the scope of a given forum. Again, my thread is not at all the only one, I was considering posting about other threads that had been closed, this just prompted me for obvious reasons.

ElaineG, there's no way a public forum would ever be held liable for a user _linking_ to a clip on an entirely different site. The site keeping the clip may be held liable, but that's an entirely different issue. Either way, if that was the concern you could simply have deleted the link. Again, this is not about closing threads or deleting questionable links, it's about the indiscriminate practice of some moderators to delete entire threads.

The users are what make this forum. They're the resources. The more users you alienate the less resources you have.


----------



## cuchuflete

One of the least effective ways to conduct a debate—unless one is dealing with the electorate— is to repeat the same thing many times, always painting opinion as fact.

Your thread, duckie, in my opinion, and in the judgment of the Italian moderators, was not a language thread, was not posted in the appropriate forum, violated forum rules in a rather minor way, and was neither on-topic nor off-topic.  It was a self-contained bit of your own commentary on a video clip, together with a request for a transcription.

It did not belong in that forum.  It will not be restored.  It will not be opened for viewing, no matter how often you tell the readers here that you could do a much better job of running the forums.  

Your thread may have a valid and worthy place in the world, but not within WR Forums.  

You have made clear that, in your opinion, moderators (subsequently softened to "some" moderators)

-pursue a mania
-act randomly
-have poor judgment, if any judgment at all
-are rude and discourteous and trample on the hard work of
 those who post here
-are guilty of excessive deletions
-behave senselessly
-don't know as much as you about copyright litigation
-do not have the capacity to recognize that deleted threads should  be left closed, visible, as monuments to the fine efforts of those who have not understood what is not appropriate to these forums. 

If I have omitted anything from your bill of particulars, I don't expect that will have a material effect on the image you have repeatedly presented.  


I am going to close this thread now, as another repetition is not required.  You have stated your points forcefully and clearly.


----------



## ElaineG

> ElaineG, there's no way a public forum would ever be held liable for a user _linking_ to a clip on an entirely different site. The site keeping the clip may be held liable, but that's an entirely different issue.


 
Just for the record -- that's an entirely incorrect analysis of U.S. intellectual property law.

ElaineG, Esq., Attorney at Law.


----------

