Should mass deletion of one's own posts be permitted?

Yes, you're right - this is a serious issue - and there is certainly room for legitimate differences of opinion: hence this thread, in which differing opinions can be resolved or at least expressed and thrashed out. Thank you for sharing your own opinion, and for linking to that document.


OK. Which alternative method would you suggest then?

Don't try to come up with a forum policy, when this is really specific to me.

We want this to be a forum in which discussions are not semi-randomly disrupted by mass deletions of posts by their authors - potentially (which is my own preference) unless those mass deletions have a reasonable justification which stands up to scrutiny.

Is this likely to happen? It happened once in how many years? On a junk thread.

We would more than likely simply amend the membership agreement, and make ongoing membership conditional on acceptance of the amended membership agreement. But that, too, is up for discussion in this thread.


Obviously, given that Chris is our most prolific contributor with a strong interest in and mind for parapsychology, we do not want to lose him. On the other hand, I don't think that we should be craven: I don't think that we should allow the potential loss of even our most valued member to affect our decision on this issue.


I wasn't aware that thoughtful, knowledgeable people with an interest in these subjects were already being driven away from Psience Quest. Can you give some examples of these people, and their reasons for being driven away? I'm serious: we really want this forum to be attractive to anybody with a serious interest in parapsychology and related matters, especially professional and practising parapsychologists, and we are very keen to retain them and minimise the chance that they will be driven away.

I apologize. I thought Chris' departure was regretted, and I thought I remembered some recent complaints about the contraction of the forum. If the forum is humming along like you hoped, then suggestions from me for improvement should be unwelcome.

Linda

Wow. No, Linda, seriously, this isn't about you. It's hard to imagine that you could say that when you have already acknowledged that we may lose our most prolific pro-parapsychology member over this.

Really? You seriously would have initiated this poll if I hadn't deleted my posts?

Linda

If I refer to the old post that you linked, tell me if I'm misunderstanding but I'm getting the impression you're viewed here the way you were at Skeptiko. Which is not the case on my part. I'm kind of tired a bit of all those Skeptiko references, because that was another forum and my own mentality has evolved some, along with my role here - but I also understand people were marked by their experiences there, and they carry it with them.

But perhaps again I'm misunderstanding the motivations and gist of what you were saying.

I think there are major differences between here and Skeptiko. However, I am still treated unevenly here (even if it didn't come from you), based on stuff dragged over from Skeptiko, and I am telling you that I am sincerely okay with that, if you wish to continue to do so.

Linda

[Laird]

Don't try to come up with a forum policy, when this is really specific to me.

Again, Linda, that's just not true. I'm not gainsaying you just for the sake of it. Really, it's not specific to you.

There are three people who have mass deleted their posts in one or more threads over the existence of this forum. One (you) is a fairly prototypical "skeptic". One (I won't name names) is a bit of a mixture. The other (Chris) is our most prolific poster, who tends to be a "skeptical proponent" (at least, I hope he'd accept that label).

Our concerns about the actions of all three members are independent of their own attitudes towards the validity or otherwise of psi and paranormal phenomenal, and are not specific to any one of them.

In any case, I think my question still stands: what alternative approach (to a poll) do you suggest?

Is this likely to happen? It happened once in how many years? On a junk thread.

If we count by members, it has happened three times in a bit over two years. If we count by threads, it has happened four times in a bit over two years. But is that really relevant? The question, surely, is whether it should occur at all, and what effects it has on other participants in (and readers of) those threads.

I apologize. I thought Chris' departure was regretted, and I thought I remembered some recent complaints about the contraction of the forum. If the forum is humming along like you hoped, then suggestions from me for improvement should be unwelcome.

Ah, come on. There's no need for sarcasm. I was hoping we could have a meaningful discussion in this thread. If your comments were more emotionally-driven than factual, and you don't in fact know of anybody being driven away from PQ, then hopefully you can acknowledge as much.

[Laird]

Really? You seriously would have initiated this poll if I hadn't deleted my posts?

We would have initiated this poll if a tipping point had been reached - which it has been - regardless of who tipped that point.

I'm a "no" voter.

I generally take the view that what I post, I have to stand by.  I can't think of any reason I would want to mass delete posts other than the cold hard reality that they might no longer represent my thinking.  If you don't want it to be read, don't post it.

I do think it should be a noted forum policy.

That being said, I do think giving someone the ability to delete posts for some time period immediately following the post makes sense.  After all, folks may post in an emotional phase (I've certainly done that) or make a mistake they may wish to fix after having done a bit more thinking.  But going back and mass deleting posts just doesn't make any sense to me.  Now, that's just me and perhaps someone will share a rationale for such an action that might make actual sense.  I just can't think of one.

Don’t worry Linda, you can feel as ‘very strongly’ as you like about this while accusing me of being a ‘whiner’ and a ‘troll’ then complaining that you are treated differently to others. Yet thus far no-one has made an official complaint directly to ‘management’ as far as I’m aware. Thus surely contradicting your suggestion? 

It’s your unholy arrogance (and now victimhood) that I personally find every bit as distasteful as you must find my love of ‘useless’ unprofessional threads. Do you you find them useless because they contain ideas that are not to your liking? 

I answered your squeal about ‘no proponents’ before, you made no acknowledgement of my post. Yet you continue to feel it’s about you alone. No, it’s not, at least from my perspective. 

I had something similar happen a few months ago on Skeptiko, when I felt I caught out a member who was well respected but not by everyone. They then deleted a number of posts, thereby vanishing any evidence. How convenient. How cowardly. This, combined with your own and Chris’s mass deletion of posts, (for different reasons, admittedly)is why I’m happy to see this poll appear. I’m not so happy at it’s probable outcome, but we’ll see.

Again, Linda, that's just not true. I'm not gainsaying you just for the sake of it. Really, it's not specific to you.

There are three people who have mass deleted their posts in one or more threads over the existence of this forum. One (you) is a fairly prototypical "skeptic". One (I won't name names) is a bit of a mixture. The other (Chris) is our most prolific poster, who tends to be a "skeptical proponent" (at least, I hope he'd accept that label).

Our concerns about the actions of all three members are independent of their own attitudes towards the validity or otherwise of psi and paranormal phenomenal, and are not specific to any one of them.

In any case, I think my question still stands: what alternative approach (to a poll) do you suggest?

Ignore it. Just because somebody complains, doesn't mean you have to do anything about it.

If we count by members, it has happened three times in a bit over two years. If we count by threads, it has happened four times in a bit over two years. But is that really relevant? The question, surely, is whether it should occur at all, and what effects it has on other participants in (and readers of) those threads.

"Whether it should occur at all" was answered long ago when you gave people the ability to delete their posts. I don't recall any discussion on the point, then. Otherwise, are we really obliged to make everything unicorns and rainbows here? Just tell people why you don't like it and move on. They can find that persuasive enough to restore the posts, or take that into account in the future. If you are going to go around making draconian rules, I'd rather see you start to enforce civility instead.

Ah, come on. There's no need for sarcasm. I was hoping we could have a meaningful discussion in this thread. If your comments were more emotionally-driven than factual, and you don't in fact know of anybody being driven away from PQ, then hopefully you can acknowledge as much.

I had half-a-dozen people in mind, but your response made me realize that we have a quite different perspective on where we are now and where we would like to be. Seriously, there's no point in going there, if not even Chris counts.

Linda

[Laird]

I can't think of any reason I would want to mass delete posts other than the cold hard reality that they might no longer represent my thinking.

And, just out of interest, Silence, in that eventuality, what course of action would you take?

I'm a "no" voter.

I generally take the view that what I post, I have to stand by.  I can't think of any reason I would want to mass delete posts other than the cold hard reality that they might no longer represent my thinking.  If you don't want it to be read, don't post it.

I do think it should be a noted forum policy.

That being said, I do think giving someone the ability to delete posts for some time period immediately following the post makes sense.  After all, folks may post in an emotional phase (I've certainly done that) or make a mistake they may wish to fix after having done a bit more thinking.  But going back and mass deleting posts just doesn't make any sense to me.  Now, that's just me and perhaps someone will share a rationale for such an action that might make actual sense.  I just can't think of one.

Are you saying that because you feel a certain way, then everyone should be obliged to follow your feelings, even if they feel differently?

Because this isn't about whether or not people have reasons to delete posts that you don't agree with. This is about not giving people a choice to differ from you.

Linda