Vanished threads list

[PeterC]

Occasionally one comes here to look up a discussion only to find that it has vanished in the night like a political dissident. Usually the reasons are easy to guess (such as the recent Shiva thread in the Tibetan forum), but sometimes they’re really not obvious at all, perhaps because the prohibited discussion happened after you last saw it.

Would it be possible to keep somewhere a record of which thread had been so disposed, without of course showing the content of the thread?

I should add that I agree with the vast majority of the moderation decisions taken here - this is just a question of knowing what happened.

[amanitamusc]

Occasionally one comes here to look up a discussion only to find that it has vanished in the night like a political dissident. Usually the reasons are easy to guess (such as the recent Shiva thread in the Tibetan forum), but sometimes they’re really not obvious at all, perhaps because the prohibited discussion happened after you last saw it.

Would it be possible to keep somewhere a record of which thread had been so disposed, without of course showing the content of the thread?

I should add that I agree with the vast majority of the moderation decisions taken here - this is just a question of knowing what happened.

[Adamantine]

Hmmmn like a graveyard for MIA threads, with tombstones and all?

[Yavana]

Occasionally one comes here to look up a discussion only to find that it has vanished in the night like a political dissident.

Armed with some basic survival training, a despicably bad sense of humor, and the stoicism of Buddhist practice and philosophy, it's possible that such threads could survive indefinitely in the wilds of the digital ether. Check the "regressive" (some would argue "last known good state" is a more accurate term,) wayback machine.

[PeterC]

Should be stupas, really, with the ashes of the offending words digitally cemated and stored inside somehow.

Or maybe a pm to those who commented on the thread saying xxx thread has been deleted because [reason]. So a private graveyard perhaps.

It’s just a bit disconcerting when the existence of an act of moderation is hidden. When a thread is locked for cleanup, closed because it’s run it’s course, or partially split into another thread - all of these are visible decisions. The deletion of a thread is the only one that is invisible, and it’s the most extreme.

[Fortyeightvows]

just let the thread be open.

[Wayfarer]

They’re not actually deleted, but moved to a space where they’re only visible to the moderators. The moderator guidelines are generally not to delete posts or threads but to move them, with the exception of obvious spamming and trolling i.e. people who join simply to advertise etc whose threads are generally deleted.

I won’t speak to the point of why particular threads have gone thus, other than to say that it is invariably accompanied with discussion, consultation and not a little hard-wringing. I suppose I could add that doctrinal and philosophical disputes are often very difficult to adjudicate as there may be strongly-held views on opposing sides, And that also maybe characteristic of the zeitgeist at this particular time.

[PeterC]

They’re not actually deleted, but moved to a space where they’re only visible to the moderators. The moderator guidelines are generally not to delete posts or threads but to move them, with the exception of obvious spamming and trolling i.e. people who join simply to advertise etc whose threads are generally deleted.

I won’t speak to the point of why particular threads have gone thus, other than to say that it is invariably accompanied with discussion, consultation and not a little hard-wringing. I suppose I could add that doctrinal and philosophical disputes are often very difficult to adjudicate as there may be strongly-held views on opposing sides, And that also maybe characteristic of the zeitgeist at this particular time.

So the threads enter into eternalism rather than nihilism?

As I said, I’m not arguing with editorial decisions. Generally I find the judgement used to be good. I’m just suggesting that those engaged in a discussion in good faith be told that that discussion has been forcefully liberated, and for what general reason. But this is just a suggestion for your consideration.

[Grigoris]

Occasionally one comes here to look up a discussion only to find that it has vanished in the night like a political dissident. Usually the reasons are easy to guess (such as the recent Shiva thread in the Tibetan forum), but sometimes they’re really not obvious at all, perhaps because the prohibited discussion happened after you last saw it.

Would it be possible to keep somewhere a record of which thread had been so disposed, without of course showing the content of the thread?

I should add that I agree with the vast majority of the moderation decisions taken here - this is just a question of knowing what happened.

Not a bad idea.

I can understand why it would be disconcerting.

-----

Moderators are called upon to make (at times tough) decisions regarding the content of discussions:

Many threads NEVER make it to public view.

Sometimes a thread is a tough call in terms of content. We give the benefit of the doubt and the discussion begins.

Then it veers off track and we may split it into other topics.

Then the personal attacks start and we have to edit out individual posts and issue warnings.

Then they continue and we lock the thread and clean it up and sometimes we issue suspensions.

Then they continue again and so we lock it permanently.

Then people start meta-discussion threads and they are removed from sight (more warnings and suspensions).

Then some people continue to complain about the presence of the thread, due to it's content for example, and so the thread disappears completely.

-----

So, there it is in a nutshell.

Basically moderators look like the bad guys (and sometimes, due to human weakness they are), but basically it is incredible how unbelievably shitty the behaviour of people is on forums.

So when you see a squeaky clean thread: without ad homs, without off-topic meanderings, free from overt controversy, the chances are that the crap has been moderated out of it.

I am sure that all of you have been on Facebook and seen what an un-moderated discussion looks like?

Sadly, and though one would believe that as Buddhists we should be somewhat better behaved than our 4chan primate cousins, it is actually not really the case.

This is my third stint here as moderator since the inception of the board and I can assure you that I can count on one hand (two if I am pushed) the number of self-regulating nice person Buddhists on this forum. I can assure you that I am not one of them (I have three formal warnings under my name).

[Grigoris]

just let the thread be open.

I recommend you go spend spend some time on an un-moderated (is that even a term?) forum.

[Grigoris]

...

PS In order to do all the things that I outlined above, you have to read EVERY SINGLE POST. Every single one of them. You know how taxing it is to have to read through and assess the mental excretion of every single toxic post? It makes a proctologists job look like a stroll through a field of lavender.

lavender field Provence France.jpg (293.35 KiB) Viewed 3091 times

Even my work as a psychologist with victims of rape, torture, war and extreme violence is less taxing. At least there the patients recognise they have problems (except for the severely psychotic ones) and want to find solutions.

[PeterC]

...

I appreciate the time and effort that goes into turning online ‘debate’ into something resembling intelligent conversation, and am very grateful to the moderation group for doing this work. Again, I wasn’t arguing with moderation decisions - just raising a suggestion. Perhaps there’s some easy technical way to do this, but if not, I certainly wouldn’t say that this merits human work.