|
LadyPact -> RE: Wishing you well (8/2/2011 6:33:05 PM)
|
For what it's worth, here's My five cents. (Up from two because I know this is going to be a bit long.)
If anybody missed what's happening, here's a quick recap. This is just My perspective, so if you disagree, I'll be more than happy to hear other views.
We started with thread A. I don't think thread A was a great original. This is, in part, because thread A was very poorly presented. Had the author done a better job in expressing her point, the thread wouldn't have gone down the tubes as quickly as it did. The original in and of itself wasn't a blatant TOS violation, but at least some of the replies were bordering on it, if not crossing the line. Thread A was temporarily pulled to clean it up.
I'm going to pause right here for a moment because I actually agree with that method. In My opinion, temporarily pulling a thread to fix it up (or locking it for a duration) seems to be the best way to handle such things. It falls into the 'work smarter, not harder' category. I won't speak for the Mods, but when I have a project, I only want to do it once. I wouldn't want to have to go back over the same thread, with people still contributing while I'd be working on it, replying to stuff that I was in the middle of removing, etc. As I'm very familiar with <smirk> if you quote something that gets pulled, that comment has to be pulled too. I wouldn't want to have to do that.
During the clean up phase of thread A, thread B gets started to ask why thread A is gone. In My opinion, this is not the best approach. As I said on thread B before it went away, I tend to just contact VAA and ask why a thread went gently into that good night. I do this not because I don't want to deal with the Mod who pulled the thread, but sometimes, because I just don't know which Mod did what and I know that VAA has always said that she will answer such questions. Maybe I'm wrong but this approach has worked for Me on a number of occasions.
In the meantime, thread A gets put back within a decent time frame. Thread B goes away. I'm on the fence about this. While 1) the issue didn't really exist anymore, so some could say thread B wasn't needed and 2) thread B should have probably been posted in off topic, there are two ways to see that decision. Not everybody knows how to handle these situations, even though it's been publicly stated a number of times. Sure, *I* know to contact VAA and so do a number of forum regulars, but somebody who doesn't spend time reading threads in other sections might not. I lean towards moving such threads to the appropriate forum with the link showing where it has gone.
Thread C is this thread. In this, while I also enjoy LnT's postings here, she might just be making the best decision for herself. Not because of the threads in question, but because of how the topic of thread A (or at least what seemed to be interpreted from it) has been one of the issues that makes her unhappy with this site. She has often mentioned not liking the a/s/l search criteria ability here and not being happy with what she deals with on her social profile as a result. Maybe more than most. I won't speak for LnT directly, as we haven't discussed the matter. Still, I could see why she would prefer to leave this site and spend her time at one that is more suited for her.
In either case, all of the best, LnT. Do what is the best fit for you.
|
|
|
|
