' Wrote:Either way, some green text would be appreciated.
Sindroms specifically wanted some inflammatory material removed, and rightfully so from the looks of it.
An "OP" can also request that a topic be closed. Wouldn't you rather have one gadfly swatted than having everyone's "fun" curtailed by closing the thread?
' Wrote:Sindroms specifically wanted some inflammatory material removed, and rightfully so from the looks of it.
An "OP" can also request that a topic be closed. Wouldn't you rather have one gadfly swatted than having everyone's "fun" curtailed by closing the thread?
Will pink do, Mr. n00bl3t?
Mal the question remains, does the thread starter have the right to decide who can post and what they can post in a thread, which is what Mwerte's post stated. Or is it only inflamitory posts?
' Wrote:It will be removed. My stance has always been that the origional author of a thread is in charge of that thread, unless it is deamed to be abusive (I.E. a trial by forum) or unsuitable for the forums. As such, they can request thread "cleanings", someone to stay out of that thread, thread to be deleted/locked, ect.
So yes, if someone asks a question and then doesn't like the answers they can be removed. I see it as an anti-troll measure. (Troll: someone looking to spit in someone's eye to cause an argument for personal pleasure).
' Wrote:Mal the question remains, does the thread starter have the right to decide who can post and what they can post in a thread, which is what Mwerte's post stated. Or is it only inflamitory posts?
Good question. I'll let mwerte respond for himself.
As to my own policy.. "If it quacks like a duck.."
Edit: Ah, I see someone found a reasonably concise answer and quoted it, Zelot.
I also feel that Moderators for the most part are also very familiar with the sound of certain species of ducks farting underwater. Cheers.
' Wrote:Sindroms specifically wanted some inflammatory material removed, and rightfully so from the looks of it.
An "OP" can also request that a topic be closed. Wouldn't you rather have one gadfly swatted than having everyone's "fun" curtailed by closing the thread?
Will pink do, Mr. n00bl3t?
The light rhetoric is a welcome change.
I have no problems with the removal of inflammatory posts at the request of the OP, I just wanted clarification as to whether someone can make a thread and specifically refuse one person the right to post in it when others still can.
Whilst pink is appreciated, and orange is too. Green would be nicer, as it is a statement set in stone.
How about a "Report" button on everyones Post then? The post will be reported and an Admin will look over it.
Seen that in different forums and works fine.
"Who is it doing this synthetic type of alpha beta psychedelic funkin'?"
Ok, Mwerte, could you please clarify if what your saying is a standered. Do the person who originally posts a topic allowed to decide who can post there and what they can post there?
My opinion as a forum member and as a moderator on other forums is that the OP can request to have specific posts deleted, and the moderator will take a look and delete or not delete. In addition, an OP can at any time ask moderators to close his thread, and the moderators should do it, no questions asked.