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

[Laird]

Are you planning on going ahead with this anyway, based on majority rule?

I've indicated my (current) position on that already:

https://psiencequest.net/forums/thread-s...3#pid35633

It seems, though, that the only alternative you propose to a general public consultation...

A general public consultation would have been okay, I suspect. The problem with starting things off with a poll, was that it looked very much like you were taking a vote.

"Screw it, just make an executive decision to assume that it doesn't matter".

Your response to my suggestion indicates that I was correct: you view anybody who disagrees with you as a "whiner", and you seem to think that we (forum moderators/founders) should just override the views of "whiners" without even giving them a voice.

I was thinking perhaps it is possible to have enough of an ethical sense to recognize what does and does not fall under your purview. As a more extreme example, what if a bunch of forum members came to you insisting that all members have their names and addresses published, because they are angry at one of the members and want to find them in real life. Could you not make an executive decision that you don't need to consider the possibility, as it would be unethical to do so?

The approach we have taken, on the other hand, has given you a (strong) voice, so it's hard to understand your willingness to silence the voices of those who disagree with you.

I didn't suggest that you silence the voices of those who disagree with me. I would be very opposed to that idea. Anyone here is free to discuss the matter on the forum, which is what someone did.

I was suggesting that, as a moderator/administrator, you may not be obliged to consider actions which are marginally ethical, at best. Whether or not this was one of them, is worth discussing. My response you quoted suggesting otherwise was tongue-in-cheek (which I thought was obvious, even though I am truly annoyed about our fabulous red Adirondack chairs  ).  

It certainly seems to be a one-sided approach, much like your approach of "I'll delete any and all of my posts that I care to, and screw anybody who doesn't like it" is one-sided.

Rest assured, that would never be my approach, so you don't need to take that into consideration. The worst it would ever be is, "while I will consider the effect on other forum members generally, priority goes to those who have not demonstrated that they are incapable of sincere engagement." I did mention that had Brian complained, I would have asked for those posts to be restored, for example.

Linda

I've indicated my (current) position on that already:

https://psiencequest.net/forums/thread-s...3#pid35633

I know. But in light of that, it didn't make sense that you were worried about the representativeness of the poll results.

Linda

[Laird]

As a more extreme example, what if a bunch of forum members came to you insisting that all members have their names and addresses published, because they are angry at one of the members and want to find them in real life. Could you not make an executive decision that you don't need to consider the possibility, as it would be unethical to do so?

It's so extreme an example that it's simply not applicable. The fact that so many reasonable members of this forum have voted in this poll for options to which you are so vehemently opposed suggests that your characterisation of the subject matter of the poll as "not within the purview" of ... well, I don't even know to whom you refer, whether it be forum founders/moderators or the general forum community ... is rejected by the majority of the forum.

You and others have vehemently suggested that this poll was an intolerably bad idea from the outset, yet the votes within and response to it indicate that that viewpoint is itself a marginal idea on this forum.

It's so extreme an example that it's simply not applicable. The fact that so many reasonable members of this forum have voted in this poll for options to which you are so vehemently opposed suggests that your characterisation of the subject matter of the poll as "not within the purview" of ... well, I don't even know to whom you refer, whether it be forum founders/moderators or the general forum community ... is rejected by the majority of the forum.

You and others have vehemently suggested that this poll was an intolerably bad idea from the outset, yet the votes within and response to it indicate that that viewpoint is itself a marginal idea on this forum.

I chose an extreme example in order to make it clear what I was referring to with "not within the purview of the moderator/administrator", not because I thought that everyone would agree that "mass deletion" falls into that category. However, your assumptions are not valid. Given that a large majority of the forum has not voted in the poll (let alone voted in favour of prohibiting mass deletions), there's no indication one way or the other how the majority feels.

Agreed, some of us think that it shouldn't be an idea under consideration by the moderators, and some do. We come to this forum with different sets of ethical and moral standards (and that's a good thing). I'm not sure what your point is with that.

Let me be clear - when I tell you what my opinion is on a subject, in no way is that meant to imply that you or anyone else should have the same opinion as me. My hope is that you (the general you) understand my opinion, but I am less concerned over whether you share it.

Linda

[Laird]

However, your assumptions are not valid. Given that a large majority of the forum has not voted in the poll (let alone voted in favour of prohibiting mass deletions), there's no indication one way or the other how the majority feels.

I said only that the results "suggest" what the majority think. Since, yes, the majority of the forum have not even logged in to the forum during the course of the poll, let alone voted, we can only go by those who have. But I strongly disagree that "there's no indication one way or the other how the majority feels". I think we have useful information on that score. That information indicates that the majority view the poll as valid: only two members so far have refrained from voting on the basis that the poll is invalid.

We come to this forum with different sets of ethical and moral standards (and that's a good thing). I'm not sure what your point is with that.

Well, one point that I can make is that you seem to have little respect for those with differing viewpoints to your own. You have been (aggressively) implying if not outright stating that those with different standards to you are mistreating you.

I said only that the results "suggest" what the majority think. Since, yes, the majority of the forum have not even logged in to the forum during the course of the poll, let alone voted, we can only go by those who have. But I strongly disagree that "there's no indication one way or the other how the majority feels". I think we have useful information on that score. That information indicates that the majority view the poll as valid: only two members so far have refrained from voting on the basis that the poll is invalid.

That still doesn't suggest what the majority feels. From the discussion, at least some of the people who voted on the poll regard it as invalid, but voted anyways. And the majority (by far) of the people who have logged in and could have voted on the poll, did not. It could be the case that they did not because they viewed the poll as invalid.

If you learn anything about polls, please, please, please learn that you cannot draw general conclusions from a biased response. 

Well, one point that I can make is that you seem to have little respect for those with differing viewpoints to your own. You have been (aggressively) implying if not outright stating that those with different standards to you are mistreating you.

I do not think that people with different standards are mistreating me. If you mean forcing me to hold to a standard I don't agree with, that might count. But nobody has done so here, yet.

I generally have respect for those with differing viewpoints, although this comes with lots of caveats, given that some of these viewpoints involve harming or restricting the rights and freedoms of others. I find it difficult to respect our resident pedophile, for example, but most of the time I have no trouble respecting people like Brian, Ninshub, Silence, Sciborg, MaxB, Typoz, stephenw, manjit, Chris, and others.

Linda

Well, certainly justified or worthy. Clever or heroic seems an odd standard, especially given that the vast majority of posts don't even fulfill those obligations, let alone the absence of those posts. Although I suppose there can be a certain bravery in taking an action which is known to be unpopular.

However, "you should have to do what I want, for any reason" (no one seems to feel that their purported reason needs to be supported) seems the very definition of pomposity when compared to "I should be able to do what I want, unless there is good reason not to [ETA], in my judgement". And I'm afraid that "I cannot be put to even the slightest inconvenience if ever I wish to revisit old conversations" wins the fragility battle over "I want to make it easier on myself to let go of petty grievances".

Flouncing is something different, though. That can be fun to watch.

Linda

Ok... But I was only trying to canvas opinions on flouncing off with mass deletions.

All good x

Ok... But I was only trying to canvas opinions on flouncing off with mass deletions.

All good x

I'm not entirely sure anymore that I've seen that. A couple of months ago I would have said, "yes," when the sole moderator and founder of a forum I am on (completely unrelated to parapsychology) up and left, deleting all her posts along the way (fortunately she handed over the reins before she left, so no harm was done). At the time, I gave a giant eyeroll over her actions, because it was hard to see something like that as anything but a "screw you". But my perspective has changed and looking back over everything, I'm pretty sure I was wrong about that. Her purported reasoning (passed on through the grapevine) actually rings true now and makes a lot of sense.

I have a vague recollection of someone on this forum doing the same thing, but I can't remember who it was or what the circumstances were. The references made to the incidence make it sound like a flounce, but it can't have been that successful if I can't remember who it was.

Anyways, I think a mass deletion alone doesn't count as a flounce - you need some drama - announcements, threats, begging, foreshadowing, etc. It can't be any fun if nobody notices. I think the only flounces I've seen have been when people leave (or quasi-leave) or put people on ignore. I could have missed some mass deletions, though. They aren't always that obvious after the fact.

Linda

[Laird]

Linda, far be it from me to quibble with your good self about polling. Suffice it to say that I continue to think that it's reasonable to maintain that the results of this poll (strongly) suggest that the majority view it as valid.

I do not think that people with different standards are mistreating me.

Good, because I used that word advisedly. Earlier in the thread you had written that it had become clear to you that I was "equally willing to treat Chris badly".