Public Service Announcement: Re: Non-Infracted Disappearing Posts

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

If your post disappears and there is no way it could have reasonably violated the ToS, before you getting upset or assuming bad-faith, please consider the following:

1) Did it quote one or more other posts?  If so, it is quite possible that a previous post in the discussion chain got modded and your post (like any that followed in the discussion chain) was collateral as a result.  This is essentially the “did you try restarting your computer” of reasons for deletion without infraction.  

2) Was your post something that might have technically been a violation of the ToS, but didn’t seem like that big a deal (ex: a harmless joke)?  If so, someone probably reported it and the mod’s hands were tied b/c of ToS, but also thought A) the post in question really wasn’t that big a deal and/or B) the post shouldn’t be counted against you if you somehow found yourself under consideration for sanctions in the future.  

3) If nothing else, feel free to PM TG and/or myself or DM me on discord.  I can only speak for myself, but as long as you’re respectful, I will be happy to discuss the issue in more detail.  

4) If you feel you were unfairly/wrongly modded, again, please don’t hesitate to respectfully reach out (even if the post was deleted without infraction).  I can only speak for myself, but as long as you are respectful, I will hear you out and keep an open mind.  I don’t know how to restore deleted posts (maybe TG does idk?), but you may be able to get the infraction points removed.

[Antonio the Sixth]

1) Did it quote one or more other posts?  If so, it is quite possible that a previous post in the discussion chain got modded and your post (like any that followed in the discussion chain) was collateral as a result.  This is essentially the “did you try restarting your computer” of reasons for deletion without infraction.

If the only thing objectionable about a post is that it quotes another post, standard practice should be to edit it so as to remove the offending quote, while leaving the poster's own contributions intact. There's a reason mods have the ability to edit posts. It seems deeply unfair to a poster to delete a reply they might have put a lot of thought and effort into just because the person they were replying to is an asshole.

[Badger]

1) Did it quote one or more other posts?  If so, it is quite possible that a previous post in the discussion chain got modded and your post (like any that followed in the discussion chain) was collateral as a result.  This is essentially the “did you try restarting your computer” of reasons for deletion without infraction.

If the only thing objectionable about a post is that it quotes another post, standard practice should be to edit it so as to remove the offending quote, while leaving the poster's own contributions intact. There's a reason mods have the ability to edit posts. It seems deeply unfair to a poster to delete a reply they might have put a lot of thought and effort into just because the person they were replying to is an asshole.

Very much agree. This is what I always attempted to do myself when I was a mod, making perhaps rare exceptions when the response to a deleted post without context would have made it essentially nonsensical and offered nothing to the conversation whatsoever. Otherwise, absolutely yes.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

1) Did it quote one or more other posts?  If so, it is quite possible that a previous post in the discussion chain got modded and your post (like any that followed in the discussion chain) was collateral as a result.  This is essentially the “did you try restarting your computer” of reasons for deletion without infraction.

If the only thing objectionable about a post is that it quotes another post, standard practice should be to edit it so as to remove the offending quote, while leaving the poster's own contributions intact. There's a reason mods have the ability to edit posts. It seems deeply unfair to a poster to delete a reply they might have put a lot of thought and effort into just because the person they were replying to is an asshole.

I used to do what you’re suggesting (despite it often being a ton of extra work), but folks screamed bloody murder about it so often that I don’t do it anymore.  For better or worse, the posts quoting it now get deleted too and I don’t see that changing at this point.

[Antonio the Sixth]

1) Did it quote one or more other posts?  If so, it is quite possible that a previous post in the discussion chain got modded and your post (like any that followed in the discussion chain) was collateral as a result.  This is essentially the “did you try restarting your computer” of reasons for deletion without infraction.

If the only thing objectionable about a post is that it quotes another post, standard practice should be to edit it so as to remove the offending quote, while leaving the poster's own contributions intact. There's a reason mods have the ability to edit posts. It seems deeply unfair to a poster to delete a reply they might have put a lot of thought and effort into just because the person they were replying to is an asshole.

I used to do what you’re suggesting (despite it often being a ton of extra work), but folks screamed bloody murder about it so often that I don’t do it anymore.  For better or worse, the posts quoting it now get deleted too and I don’t see that changing at this point.

I don't know who was complaining and why, but as far as I'm concerned you are more than welcome to delete the quote an leave the rest of the post intact. I get that it takes a couple clicks more but I don't think it's too much to ask given that I also try to put effort in my replies.

[GeneralMacArthur]

If a post of mine is removed I would strongly prefer that it be infracted so I can at least find it in my "Moderated Posts" page.  I've had a few posts disappear -- totally innocuous posts, so I'm assuming simply because they were part of larger threads that got disappeared -- and had absolutely no idea what happened to them.

[John Dule]

1) Did it quote one or more other posts?  If so, it is quite possible that a previous post in the discussion chain got modded and your post (like any that followed in the discussion chain) was collateral as a result.  This is essentially the “did you try restarting your computer” of reasons for deletion without infraction.

If the only thing objectionable about a post is that it quotes another post, standard practice should be to edit it so as to remove the offending quote, while leaving the poster's own contributions intact. There's a reason mods have the ability to edit posts. It seems deeply unfair to a poster to delete a reply they might have put a lot of thought and effort into just because the person they were replying to is an asshole.

I used to do what you’re suggesting (despite it often being a ton of extra work), but folks screamed bloody murder about it so often that I don’t do it anymore.  For better or worse, the posts quoting it now get deleted too and I don’t see that changing at this point.

I don't know who was complaining and why, but as far as I'm concerned you are more than welcome to delete the quote an leave the rest of the post intact. I get that it takes a couple clicks more but I don't think it's too much to ask given that I also try to put effort in my replies.

Completely agreed. I’d rather have the infraction honestly; at least then I can look back at my moderated posts and see what I wrote. Memoryholing a post shouldn’t be allowed.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Where would we be without Mr X?

Nowhere, that's where.