Why did mods delete my post?

originally posted by: rickymouse
They deleted it because they could. If you don't get a few posts deleted, you are not normal here. Although some people are really nice..... I wonder if New-here ever got a post deleted?

New-here!





Wasn't exactly my target demographic.

a reply to: rickymouse

Just the naughty ones

originally posted by: visitedbythem
a reply to: rickymouse

Just the naughty ones

The ones that want to be naughty (in an effective kind of way) but haven't figured out how to do that while remaining inside what seem to be pretty clear boundries to us.

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

Wonder how many have been kicked off here for pursuing valid reasons beyond a PM or 2 and not getting it.

originally posted by: Antisocialist
a reply to: Ghostsdogood

Wonder how many have been kicked off here for pursuing valid reasons beyond a PM or 2 and not getting it.

I've seen an almost uncountable number over the years.

And even when mods do answer (most are very good about this, but we all have lives to live), they aren't really allowed to provide advice on how to make a point without breaking the rules, only to explain what the rules are.

I'd like to offer more than that if we ever find an acceptable way to do it as users, I don't think mods could participate in giving editorial advice

Everyone benefits when any users's ATS skills improve. Nobody here wants one side of any kind of issue to 'win' a debate only because his or her opponent was unskilled in the ways of ATS, we want the 'winner' to always be the 'side' with the actual facts, or best theory possible.

Why else would anyone be here in the first place?

Well that, and all the free tinfoil in the dumpster around back.

a reply to: JimmyNeutr0n


I'm not a mod or staff, but this looks like an unavoidable decision for practical/survival reasons.

Larger sites don't need to worry about being deplatformed for linking to sites that their hosts ban.

ATS has to play by rules set by others, just like we do.


The rule is no linking to that site.

Black and white rule.

ATS does seem to offer a (somewhat clumsy) workaround though, and almost nobody else allowed that at the time.

Don't think anyone can help you with this one beyond that.

originally posted by: Ghostsdogood
a reply to: JimmyNeutr0n


I'm not a mod or staff, but this looks like an unavoidable decision for practical/survival reasons.

Larger sites don't need to worry about being deplatformed for linking to sites that their hosts ban.

ATS has to play by rules set by others, just like we do.

Arbitrary. Unavoidable? No.

I'm just recollecting what makes ATS and FB different.

There are plenty of options open to ATS to not be in that prisoner chain, but they're willingly choosing not to take that route.

originally posted by: JimmyNeutr0n

originally posted by: Ghostsdogood
a reply to: JimmyNeutr0n


I'm not a mod or staff, but this looks like an unavoidable decision for practical/survival reasons.

Larger sites don't need to worry about being deplatformed for linking to sites that their hosts ban.

ATS has to play by rules set by others, just like we do.

Arbitrary. Unavoidable? No.

I'm just recollecting what makes ATS and FB different.

There are plenty of options open to ATS to not be in that prisoner chain, but they're willingly choosing not to take that route.

Maybe you missed that your disagreement appears to be with hosting companies, not ATS.

This is just a rule that sites like ATS must follow.

FB is far larger and hosts itself, they have no provider setting rules for them.


(I am not a mod or staff)

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

If a man told you to shoot someone, and you shot them, would the courts disagreement be with you or the man who told you to shoot someone? Probably both tbh...lol

I've never seen this rule written in American or international law, but that's why I mentioned arbitrary.

Is this a good time to solicit the Fedaverse to Springer...?

originally posted by: JimmyNeutr0n
a reply to: Ghostsdogood

If a man told you to shoot someone, and you shot them, would the courts disagreement be with you or the man who told you to shoot someone? Probably both tbh...lol

I've never seen this rule written in American or international law, but that's why I mentioned arbitrary.

Is this a good time to solicit the Fedaverse to Springer...?

No.

This doesn't really seem the place for that type of debate.


Thank you for bringing up the wiki issue though, I'm sure nobody likes it, but see nothing that can be done about it either.

(I am not a mod or staff)

originally posted by: JimmyNeutr0n
Off-topic chat about the fedaverse, nevermind.

#delete

Thank you Jimmy!

I didn't see it, but deleting was probably wise.

Would like to learn more about it on the boards though.

a reply to: JimmyNeutr0n


We aren't talking about criminal law, only contract law.

The person you referred to appears to be describing a contractual issue that led to the rapid deplatforming of many sites at that time.

Doesn't matter if right or wrong, or even defendable after a lengthy lawsuit. He appears to be saying that this work around was the best that he could negotiate from ATS' host at the time.

From personal experience unrelated to ATS in any way, this was a major problem for a very large number of sites of all types at the time, and I've never heard of any of them negotiating a work around like this, or even one that made any kind of serious attempt to do so.

If you do it carefully, you can probably still squeeze a discussion on even this very sensitive topic within T&C, but it would require careful wording by everyone involved. Make no mistake, it's a hot potato around here.

One idea might be to pick some other site, unrelated to ATS, with similar issues to use as sort of a proxy.

This seems to be sort of a hair trigger subject for mods, so you would probably need to not mention ATS at all, only that proxy site.

Would also try to set the tone more investigatory than accusational, participants will generally follow the lead on this from your op if you stick to a just the facts tone.

ATS folks might actually be excited about the opportunity on this topic if you get it right, and no harm in trying.

If you decide to try this, it may be a good idea to send the exact text you intend to use for your op to your favorite Mod for kind of an acceptable/unacceptable opinion before you post it.

This one really does require a bit of caution, as do most subjects related to the business side of ATS.

It's none of our damn business, and this isn't the proper platform for discussing it even if it was.

(I am not a mod or staff)

a reply to: JimmyNeutr0n


I highly recommend that you politely ask your favorite Mod why that last post was deleted.

There were a couple of obvious NoNos that I'm not sure I can discuss here without getting in trouble myself.

Simple things.

Just get the answer & move on.


(I am not a Mod or staff)

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

Because you didn't read or follow or can't comprehend the T&Cs.

1 of those three.

Simple as that usually.

I've been guilty of #2 a few times, lol.

originally posted by: MykeNukem
a reply to: Ghostsdogood

Because you didn't read or follow or can't comprehend the T&Cs.

1 of those three.

Simple as that usually.

I've been guilty of #2 a few times, lol.

It's been a while for me, but I do recall a long personal battle with #3.

And quite a few intentional choices on #2.



(I am not a Mod or Staff)

a reply to: rickymouse

If you don't get a few posts deleted, you are not normal here.

Does that mean I was once SUPER normal ?

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: rickymouse

If you don't get a few posts deleted, you are not normal here.

Does that mean I was once SUPER normal ?

Perhaps, Extraterrestrial?


(Binge watching alien movies this weekend)

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

I have been a member here for over 12 years and sometimes
"complain" about those pesky T&C rules myself,but they're
very necessary.