Thread Disappearing?

[ceeboo]

About 20-40 minutes ago, I read a lengthy thread in this forum. Now I see that it has vanished from the board.

Perhaps the author of the OP deleted the thread? - Can that even be done? Perhaps it was removed by a mod for a legitimate reason?

I'm asking because I don't want to see this board turn into another Twitter (pre-Musk) or YouTube where select people decide what all of us are allowed to read and/or discuss.

So, what happened to the thread?

[canpakes]

Hi, Ceeboo -

A thread that no longer exists may have been removed if authored by a sock puppet whose original account has been previously warned about sock activity.

If a member is unable to move their point forward in past discussions, then creating additional sock puppets to repeat the same claims really isn’t practical, nor does it conform to Shades’s rules.

[ceeboo]

Hi, Ceeboo -

Hi.

A thread that no longer exists may have been removed if authored by a sock puppet whose original account has been previously warned about sock activity.

"May have been removed?"

Are you saying that you don't know why it no longer exists? Or did you remove it? Or something else?

[canpakes]

Hi, Ceeboo -

Hi.

A thread that no longer exists may have been removed if authored by a sock puppet whose original account has been previously warned about sock activity.

"May have been removed?"

Are you saying that you don't know why it no longer exists? Or did you remove it? Or something else?

My comment addresses removed threads in general. I prefer not to refer to specific individuals unless unusual circumstances warrant it.

[Gadianton]

Perhaps the author of the OP deleted the thread? - Can that even be done?

Yes. Next time you post, notice the X next to edit. You can delete until somebody responds.

Ceeboo,

I also read this lengthy post. I gave it a 99.99% chance of it being A-Mike, and a .01 chance of being a legitimate new poster to the forum who suddenly has all this knowledge of Binger, me, Doc Cam, opinions about board governance and etc.

How about you?

What percent odds would you give the author of that post being A-Mike?
What percent odds would you give the author of that post being a new member of the forum with only a couple posts?
What percent odds would you give the author of that post being a not-new member using an alternative handle?

[ceeboo]

My comment addresses removed threads in general. I prefer not to refer to specific individuals unless unusual circumstances warrant it.

You certainly don't need to get my approval for things that are done on this board (I'm but a single board member) but I must admit that I am not satisfied by your fairly vague replies. Like I mentioned to you before on another thread, my concern is the perception (real or not) of staging the public square and/or sanitizing board content. It will destroy this board - Full stop.

[ceeboo]

Perhaps the author of the OP deleted the thread? - Can that even be done?

Yes. Next time you post, notice the X next to edit. You can delete until somebody responds.

Really. I didn't know that. Thanks.

Ceeboo,

I also read this lengthy post. I gave it a 99.99% chance of it being A-Mike, and a .01 chance of being a legitimate new poster to the forum who suddenly has all this knowledge of Binger, me, Doc Cam, opinions about board governance and etc.

How about you?

What percent odds would you give the author of that post being A-Mike?
What percent odds would you give the author of that post being a new member of the forum with only a couple posts?
What percent odds would you give the author of that post being a not-new member using an alternative handle?

Given that the OP displayed intimate knowledge of some of the participants on the board, I would say the odds are pretty high that it was a sock. What I am much less sure of is who's sock it was. To be honest, the post here was very well written, so........

[canpakes]

My comment addresses removed threads in general. I prefer not to refer to specific individuals unless unusual circumstances warrant it.

You certainly don't need to get my approval for things that are done on this board (I'm but a single board member) but I must admit that I am not satisfied by your fairly vague replies. Like I mentioned to you before on another thread, my concern is the perception (real or not) of staging the public square and/or sanitizing board content. It will destroy this board - Full stop.

Ceeboo, either you appreciate that the board is provided for a community and therefore operates under a set of rules put in place by the owner, or you do not. No one is owed the ability to break rules, especially repeatedly, while claiming injury if their privilege is revoked because of it.

Sock accounts are not allowed by board rules. No exceptions are made on account of a sock’s purported ideology.

[Gadianton]

What I am much less sure of is who's sock it was. To be honest, the post here was very well written, so........

A-Mike can communicate very well when he wants to. He's had some very moving, heartfelt posts that reveal a sincere individual who wants to talk about Mormonism and his experiences as a Mormon. And his experiences in that regard were very interesting to me.

At the same time, he has thousands of other posts (in a brief time span) under his belt aimed to ruin the board for everyone else participating.

One option that he has -- and I'm assuming he's banned -- is to simply quit creating socks, let the ban expire, and start posting again, but this time stick with posts like the one that we both read. I'll bet you if he does that, there is a near zero probability that he will ever be censured again.

[ceeboo]

Ceeboo, either you appreciate that the board is provided for a community and therefore operates under a set of rules put in place by the owner, or you do not. No one is owed the ability to break rules, especially repeatedly, while claiming injury if their privilege is revoked because of it.

I appreciate it.

Sock accounts are not allowed by board rules. No exceptions are made on account of a sock’s purported ideology.

Fair enough.