Simon Kissel – of CrossKylix fame and Alternative Roadmap infamy – apparently recently re-appeared in the Delphi forums. I say apparently because Embarcadero or TeamB have seemingly been doing their best to maintain his status as a non-person. Can this be A Good Thing™?
I don’t think so.
As I say in comments to another post on this subject, if someone misbehaves in a forum sufficiently to warrant being banned from further participation, then by all means ban them. But, with any legal considerations duly taken into account, leave the offending posts up so that people can judge for themselves.
By which I mean, if the posts contain liable language (libel, slander, incitement to racial hatred etc etc) then those parts of the post should be redacted, with a note explaining why. But the posts themselves should be left.
Surely removing them leaves, or rather creates, room for doubt?
Unable to judge for themselves whether a post is justifiably deleted, people will polarise into those who fall on the side of defending the “right” to free speech without knowing what was said and those who will defend the right of the forum moderators to moderate as they see fit without knowing whether the moderation was warranted.
In any event, the look is not a good one for Embarcadero who appear heavy handed and ungracious.
Simon Kissel, whatever his previous faults or shortcomings, is if nothing else a passionate and enthusiastic participant in a Delphi Community that desperately needs people with passion and enthusiasm.
The saddest part of this is that what should have been a piece of encouraging news has been swamped by the controversy over Embarcadero’s behaviour.
A Delphi Community project that delivered something that many people found to be of great use (though I do not count myself in that group), effectively withered on the vine for the past 6 years – CrossKylix. That project has now shown signs of life once more, indicating in turn, continuance of life in the Community – and talent – that fed that project in the first place.
But rather than celebrating this we are talking about the behaviour of Embarcadero for the second time in as many weeks.
What should have been a good, healthy sign for the Delphi Community has instead highlighted again the concerns that many of us have about those who currently (and I choose my phraseology deliberately here) hold Delphi in trust on behalf of that community.
Excellent Entry Joylon couldn’t have put it better myself !
Someone apparently got this response from Embarcadero.
> Before Simon is again allowed to post anything to our discussion forums, he
> must first come to an understanding with Embarcadero, and agree to comply
> with our forum rules. However, since he didn’t comply with previous
> agreements, it would be a difficult prospect to believe he would comply now.
Sounds like the ball is in Simon’s court.
@Bruce – this sounds very strange to me. Participation is *always* on the basis of abiding by the rules. Embarcadero want him to agree in advance that he will always abide by the rules… and he has done precisely that… by participating!!
Why does this requirement to “come to an agreement with Embarcadero” not apply to *everyone*? As long as he abides by the rules there can be no complaint. Why delete posts that are acceptable simply on the basis that they suspect he will post unacceptable posts in the future.
Why should his posts be deleted any more than anyone else who has not agreed more explicitly than is stated as being required for participation in advance that all subsequent and future posts will continue to comply beyond agreeing to that by participating in the first place !?
This doesn’t actually help Embarcadero’s position at all – they are basically admitting that yes, they deleted his most recent posts for no good reason. This is very high handed imho, and this is sadly characteristic of their attitude on a number of fronts recently. They should read the parable of The Prodigal Son.
In the meantime they are making Steve Jobs look even-handed and reasonable by comparison.
I agree with Joylon. Sounds like Simon Kissel needs his own forum if EMB will not let him post to theirs. That’s why I like blogs.
As Simon conceded himself in another blog comment:
“And let’s take “mass re-posting cancelled posts using a bot is forbidden” for granted.”
He wasn’t banned because he disagreed with the powers that be. He was banned because of malicious behaviour and remains banned. It doesn’t seem unreasonable for Embarcadero to get assurances before reinstating him. I know I would if he had pulled a stunt like that on me.
@Bruce: So all of his most recent posts were mass reposted by a bot? If yes, then fine, Embarcadero are being reasonable. If not, then they are being unreasonable – he is complying with the rules of participation and should be allowed to participate. As soon as he stops behaving himself, THAT’s the point at which the forum police have an absolute right to step in.
Embarcadero are saying: “We don’t trust this person to play within the rules” on the basis of previous (VERY previous – years previous in fact) behaviour, not on the basis of current behaviour.
To use that old standby – the analogy. Let’s say you were a recidivist drunk driver. You get slapped with fines and then ultimately have your driving license revoked. Then, years later you re-take your test (which tests driving ability, but does not require you to sign a declaration promising to never break the law again). Having regained you license you then take to the road, sober and qualified to do so.
Some cop sees you, and remembers that you used to be a drunk driver and pulls you over even though you have done nothing wrong. Do you think it would be reasonable for that cop to then confiscate your license and demand you present yourself at the court and sign an undertaking before being allowed your license back ?
But back to Embarcadero, I would be interested to know under what conditions they would be willing to trust him. They don’t trust him to participate without giving his word; what on earth could he say that would make them trust his word ?
“I promise to behave myself”
“Hmm, yes, but why should we believe you?”
I agree with Joylon too. Especially last two paragraphs. They didnt just delete his posts either they were deleting posts purely asking why threads were been silently deleted and Im sure some werent aware of the history even. So IMO its even worse
Bruce the Ball is in THEIR Court why other people’s threads were deleted purely for asking about why threads were deleted IMO !
Read this especially last two entries :-
https://forums.embarcadero.com/thread.jspa?messageID=260971
It’s also pretty useless to talk about Embarcaderos forum rules if the makers of those themselves do not live by them. I can’t see what rule should be violated, including the “Simon Kissel is banned from posting to the Embarcadero forum” rule (that also has never been defined anywhere), if a user of CrossKylix posts to the third-party newsgroup, explaining that he has a bugfix for the Kylix RTL to make sure Unicode works properly. That’s as on-topic as it gets, it violates no rules, it’s constructive.
That these posts (and I’m not talking about “why are my posts deleted”-posts, which indeed are interpretable as being off-topic) are cancelled makes having rules useless. I tend not to like communication channels that have a tendency to randomly delete or silence the communication the channel should have been designed for.
It’s sad that one of the Delphi communities most important communication channels is in such a bad state.
@Simon: I agree. The only forum guideline that appears to be being followed here in these cases is the one that explains the deletion of “Why were these posts deleted?” type posts.
But to me, this is merely providing a smokescreen behind which Embarcadero can hide prejudicial decisions and then avoid having to justify or explain themselves.
They can delete anybody’s post without any reason – good or otherwise – based potentially purely on a personal grievance or grudge held unjustifiably against an individual. They can basically invent policy on the fly to suit them as and whenever they need, then when asked why, they can simply run to the cover of “We don’t discuss moderation policy”.
They say that nobody is entitled to an explanation of the operation of the forums, which is technically true, but the way in which they have expressed this is staggeringly arrogant and does them no favours, I would say.
To which I say, if you do not wish to operate the forums in a constructive manner or to allow constructive use of them by those who participate, why bother providing them in the first place?
@Jolyon,
I’m pretty sure the latest posts were not made using a spam bot. Using your analogy, if someone loses their drivers license, that doesn’t mean it’s suddenly OK for them to drive again if they don’t happen to be drinking at the time. More to the point, that driver insisting that he should be allowed to drive on their own terms doesn’t make it so.
@Simon,
So you aren’t going to talk to Embarcadero at all? That would be a shame, and I mean that.
@Bruce: You missed the key part of the analogy where the drunk driver is punished for their crimes and has privileges removed for a period of time, but they then re-qualify as a driver (years later) and resume driving, this time within the law, but continue to be punished on the basis that it is expected they will resume offending, even when their behaviour is non-offending.
I think you have literally read my mind and posted it Joylon And Simon. I personally find the overall tone breathtakingly Arrogant and was amazed when I found it.
Only thing I would slightly disagree with is saying the “Why are my posts been deleted” were justifiably off topic. Had you seen how fast threads seemed to get deleted (Which I did at one point) Im not suprised the posters concerned started to post other threads asking why. Again had a simple “This is off topic” been posted I doubt most of it would have occurred.
@Jolyon,
What’s the equivalent of re-qualification in this case? Posting a message without using a spam bot? I contend that it’s something along the lines of talking to Embarcadero.
@Bruce: I contend that it’s resuming posting to the forums where the requirements for participation are adhering to the guidelines. i.e. in the simple act of participating, Simon agrees to abide by those guidelines.
For driving, the requirement is different – you have to qualify your competency to drive (the equivalent here would be the competency to operate the forum site). That gains you a license to drive. By then putting yourself in a car, on the road, you tacitly agree to drive to the laws that apply, but you are not required to explicitly make such an undertaking.
The forums specifically do not have any “qualification” that anyone has to meet, other than abiding by the rules.
Simon’s (seemingly/reportedly/allegedly) valid, guideline compliant posts are being deleted on the basis that he *might* make other posts in the future that would not mee the guidelines. The forum has NO guidelines that allows for such pre-emptive (one might almost say “vindictive”) moderation.
They do of course have the caveat that Embarcadero can do what-ever they please and never have to explain themselves, and that is of course true, even if – as I believe in this case – they cast themselves in an incredibly poor light as a result. Their actions do NOTHING to improve Community relations. Quite the opposite.
And in the light of the recent news about Nick Hodges, it seems to me they would be best advised to be building bridges, not laying minefields.
@Bruce:
My attempts to talk with Embarcadero have been unreplied to since March. Me posting on the forums wasn’t an attempt to talk to Embarcadero, but with the community – I simply announced a new release of CrossKylix, and let people know I’m somewhat back as I plan to release some more stuff (CrossFPC). So my communication with Embarcadero is ignored, and my communication with the community is silenced.
I understood I’m not welcome and I’ll simply live with that.
@Jolyon
I looks like we don’t agree on how a ban should work, and your “he didn’t do anything wrong this time” argument isn’t convincing to me.
@Simon,
That sounds like you’re at least willing to make the attempt. Who did you try to try to contact?
@Bruce, so if your posts start getting deleted not because of what they contain but because of something you did/posted 6 years ago or because of the potential that you might misbehave in the future.. that would be “right” would it?
I think you’re right, we don’t agree. However, I won’t delete your comments for having disagreed with me, not even on the basis that you might say or do something in the future that might upset me more. 😉
Simon, just go say you are sorry for your mistakes in the past, and come to an agreement with Embarcadero about how you will conduct yourself in the future. Don’t hide behind the Borland-Codegear-Embarcadero name change thing as an excuse.
W
I personally think:
– this isn’t a democracy or a court using defined rules of guilt. This is a company-hosted and moderated blog. They can decide you have too many letters in your name and block your post if they want.
– I know from personal experience if you have dealt with a person before and he/she had irrational/egregious behaviour, the odds they have reformed are not very great. Sri, it is what it is.
– Forum moderation is a pain in the butt and the more time it takes, the bigger pain. So dealing with the problem at the submitter level is much more efficient than the post level. I block submitters regularly (they are usually spammers though).
On one of the threads there, there was a comment “first thing is we do not discuss moderation policies in public. We learned our lesson almost 2 decades ago”
The delphi forum has the air of an old farts club with moderators looking to be offended. The world may change all around, Delphi may spun off, then sold but on the forum the clock stopped in 1995 and it shows, it’s like something from the soviet Union. Is there anyone under 40 on KG-TeamB?
It wouldn’t be a bad start to get some modern forum software, a proper layout and make it easy for people to join.
honestly, I think Embarcadero & Borland were simply embarrassed that a single guy was able to do with CrossKylix what is taking a team of their engineers years to do. Can you imagine if, rather than banning him, they had instead adopted the technology? Delphi would have been in a much stronger place over the past 5 years, being able to offer a supported Linux solution. Unfortunately that mindset is all too common in business. Especially large ones, which while Emb isnt, they seem to act like one. He threatened their nice little fiefdom, and got ‘punished’. And we all lose out.
Simon,
Delphi for Mac/Linux is on Embas agenda. You are a competitor now. At least with CrossFPC. I see you more in the Lazarus camp than in the Emba camp.
Well if I thought the tone was Breathtakingly Arrogant before See the Posts on there now ! Nothing like keep digging an even bigger hole it seems to me
https://forums.embarcadero.com/thread.jspa?messageID=260971
@Simon,
Personally I would only release CrossFPC .
Peter: I can’t imagine I’m viewed as a competitor. A cross-compiler is only a cross-compiler, while Embarcadero is planning to provide the full toolchain and infrastructure. I’m not a Delphi user only because of the compiler, but also because of the IDE, component market, the community, commercial support etc. Plus as they are the makers of Delphi, they are able to integrate cross-compilation far more tightly than I am, and also are able to provide much better support for GUI applications, and also all the new language features could be used.. Once we see a Embarcadero product offering fully integrated cross-compilation, I’ll be the first to buy a bunch of licenses and use their cross-compiler for MacOS and Linux/x86 instead. I then would finall ditch CrossKylix, and keep using CrossFPC for targeting platforms they do not support – like Linux on ARM.
Both CrossKylix and CrossFPC are simply bridge technologies.
@Jolyon,
Let’s presume that someone does something (several somethings, actually) so mind numbingly stupid and malicious that that it earns them a lifetime ban. Now that person starts posting again some time later without doing anything at all to make up for the previously mentioned “somethings”. It shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone if that person’s posts are removed. After all, that person was (quite rightly) banned.
Using your drinking and driving analogy, it’s closer to someone losing their license for life and insisting that they should be allowed to drive anyway, even though they haven’t done anything to make up for having their license taken away.
In another blog comment thread, said person has at least given up all pretense and no longer wants to be part of the community. Way too controlling for him. I also doubt the sincerity of his claim to attempt to contact Embarcadero since March. I’d ask for clarification (again), but who has that kind of time?
I know you aren’t implying that Embarcadero or TeamB delete posts just because people disagree with them. Otherwise, it would be difficult to explain all the posts that disagree with them, now.
My response would be cheerier, but the more I remember about the original mess, the angrier I get. Partly at myself for getting drawn in to a way too long discussion.
Last thought. I wonder what would have happened if he had pulled the same stunts (again, plural) in forums hosted by Microsoft/IBM/Apple/Oracle/etc?
Keep digging it seems 😀 :-
https://forums.embarcadero.com/thread.jspa?messageID=260971
I think Jack Kay has a point about the Air on the forums.
The overarching issue here seems to be that guys at the helm have grown self-satisfied, and think they know better, when it’s obvious they’re just stumbling in the dark.
The Simon Kissel incident is one that went too far, but there have been, and there still are many similar smaller scale incidents: whenever someones tell them the obvious, the old Borland guys just can’t seem to accept it, despite the odds stacked against them. And they’re always prone to blame some unknown upper management, or whatever, for what are their own failings.
It’s an old citadel ruled by old barons that think they know better, and anything that goes against their rule is dealt with cold hard iron.
Not only Simon has been censured.
I posted a very “soft” post just with the announcement of the CrossKylix update, with some explanations and precisions (I use this tool for years), then the whole thread was deleted.
Simon didn’t take part of this thread, noone was infamous.
So it’s not only Simon which is in case, but also its free tool.
It just sound like a “damnatio memoriae” to me.
From wikipedia: “Damnatio memoriae is the Latin phrase literally meaning “damnation of memory” in the sense of removal from remembrance. It was a form of dishonor that could be passed by the Roman Senate upon traitors or others who brought discredit to the Roman State.”
Are we back to the tyrany of the Caesars in old Rome? Will Simon feed the lions? I hope not, at least because of CrossKylix, I’ll thumbs up and pray for mercy!
Bruce: Let’s not forget that the “malicious” thing that “earned” me a “lifetime ban” actually simply has been me reposting messages through a delphi program because TeamB was cancelling everyones message as soon as they mentioned my name. My “malicious” activity wasn’t the cause of the problem, they were an answer. The wrong answer. Back then I thought it would be OK to fight against censorship and “damnatio memoriae” (cool, I learned a new term here!).
What is happening right now is more or less exactly the same thing that happened years ago already. The only difference is now that I say to myself “screw those people” when it comes to TeamB and how Embarcadero treats the community instead of fighting back. The other difference is that compared to back then, the Embarcedero forums are far less relevant for the community than back in the days – criticism is now done in blogs – and oh wow, it’s actually possible to have a decent discussion in those, even without people hiding behind keyboards secretly deleting messages.
You can turn it any way you want, what Embarcadero does is not acceptable when it comes to corporate communication. It would make a PR professional make jump from the roof. The whole “it’s their server” stuff is completely off. From a business standpoint this server is there for their customers, us – else they simply could run it on their closed Intranet.
Plus: It’s not working. I won’t jump on the provocations TeamB is right now posting on some EDN forum I won’t link to here, even if some of them are pretty close to libel and slander. They won’t make it happen this time to make me look like I am the bad guy. If TeamB crosses a certain line, I’ll call my US lawyer to issue a cease&desist and be done with it.
Other than that, I’ll do exactly what I have announced on my only post (besides the CrossKylix announcement) I’ve ever done on the EDN forum: Check if I’m welcome, got very clearly shown that I’m not.
The whole PR desaster involved of them cancelling messages of long-time supporters and customers simply because they mention my name or CrossKylix in a post is fully theirs, and I’m not involved. They do not need me at all to a massive group session of shooting into their own feet.
Bruce:
Oh, oh, let me add this:
“I know you aren’t implying that Embarcadero or TeamB delete posts just because people disagree with them. Otherwise, it would be difficult to explain all the posts that disagree with them, now.”
You ARE aware that all posts from people disagreeing with them have been deleted, and not a single thread has survived? You are aware that they now actually did the work to get all posts from people who disagree with them deleted from the Google Cache, yes? 🙂
Oh and btw, I think you have misread my post you are referring to – I’ve never said that I do not want to be part of the community anymore. It was “Embarcadero’s communication channels do not meet my minimal standards for business or ethics, so I’ve got not interest in further using them”. EDN Delphi Community.
@A. Bouchez
Exactly its far from just Simon. Plenty were getting caught in crossfire . The thread Ive quoted a few times in here over there Ilustrates it pretty well I think. The tone some of the official replies there hardly help the situation IMHO too as Ive already commented.
I think Embarcadero is overreacting over this past incident. It’s sad to see that a 500 employee company they can’t just get over this issue. They’re acting too much defensive and acting as if a single developer can be a serious threat to their company.
Their way of dealing with problem turned it to a small crisis while they could sit and silently settle things down with Simon before this become a public crisis.
Rome = Scotts Valley
@Simon:
It seems that you have done nothing wrong and are simply being persecuted for daring to speak out against “the man”. Never give up, never surrender!
It’s been fun reminiscing, but my patience for unrepentant drunk drivers and the like is about done.
The so-called shakers and movers around Delphi have become their own worst enemies.
**** ’em & the horse they rode in on.
Well they seen to me to be determined to pour fuel on fire it seems to me.
Someone on the thread referred to previously on here got so annoyed with the official responses they firstly asked to be removed from forums and deleted all their posts. Then I assume due to the continuing tone and attitude of subsequent official responses apparently asked how to be removed from EDN completely.
A more customer friendly and polite staff member then urged them not to do this and warned of results of doing it. It then appears sometime not long after this person/s unknown decided to Ban them till 31st July !
Its only obvious as another Forum member asks why the person was banned until 31st as I assume they are in contact somehow privately. I am sure that really helped matters ?!
To be fair there is a post subsequently saying the Ban should never have been done and saying they made sure it was lifted immediately. That all been said had someone not posted there pointing it out publically I wonder would anything have been done about it ?
It’s not only Simon who’s postings got deleted, Derek Hadlington seems to be on their black list, too.
I get the feeling that, after the lay off of Nick and those recent happenings on EMBT NG’s, IMO, EMBT tries everything now to make Delphi less popular then it was before.
I’m glad that there are some community members who took this topic and post on their blogs now. Thanks for this!
Simon, your behavior was childish, and immature. So what evidence is there that there is even any change in your attitude now, about what you did then, when all you can do is defend your past behaviour?
The people who ban you are community moderators (TeamB) and although they co-operate with the corporate side, frankly, if I was the moderator of a non-commercial hobby forum, I’d ban you for the same thing.
W
Warren: Please explain why all postings from people who mention my name or the name of a product of mine should be cancelled from the Embarcadero forums because I acted “childish” 4 years ago on the Borland Newsgroups. It looks like you seem to see some valid connection here that I’m not seeing. Thanks much.
@Warren,
You forgot “repeated” and “malicious”.
@Simon,
You didn;t just act childishly. You were banned (apparently for life) for your shenanigans. I’ll leave it to Embarcadero to answer for their actions. How about taking some responsibility for yours?
it was very interesting to read http://www.deltics.co.nz
I want to quote your post in my blog. It can?
And you et an account on Twitter?
Whatever you say here Bruce it still doesnt justify the treatment of other people caught in the crossfire IMO and there is no so called about it. Its documented in that now locked thread and pointed out above by me yet again as well as Michael above.
Bruce: You may have missed this, but Embarcadero isn’t showing any intention of answering questions. They prefer to delete questions. No matter who asks.
And no, I’m not responsible for this. I’m not at all involved in Embarcadero tendency (obviously inherited from Borland) to punch their own customers into the face, and punch anyone who dares to ask if punching really is a valid form of communication.
Get over it. You don’t have to agree I’m the good guy here, but you won’t convince me otherwise, and it also doesn’t seem like you are convincing anyone else here either, no matter how hard you try.
Seeing the silence in the Embarcadero forum, the community has appeared to have voted with their feet for quite some time already. That may be OK for you – in this case I suggest you go back to the forum and enjoy the silence there, while the real discussion Embarcadero should finally start listen to is done outside of their censorship control 🙂
@Simon,
What questions are being deleted? Be specific.
What do I need to get over? I think the ban was and still is justified. Well, I did think there might be some room for reconciliation. My bad.
@Bruce: C’mon, I think enough people – other than Simon – have provided details of their questions that were deleted, with quite specific descriptions of the content, sufficient certainly to determine that those posts were well within the guidelines set for participation in the forums.
Indeed, you know that I know that you are aware of at least one such instance for which such specific details have been provided for our consideration by more private channels.
Even if you weren’t aware, there is a rich irony in your question which is of course that it is impossible to provide a direct reference to any posts that were deleted on a questionable basis because they have been deleted!
Any reference to a deleted post can be shouted down with “I’m sure it was deleted for a good reason”, safe in the knowledge that you won’t be required to justify that assertion.
Which will only add to any sense of injustice already being felt and which in no small part led to the whole debacle 6 years ago in the first place.
@Jolyon,
I suspect most of these were either responses to removed threads or reposts of the deleted messages themselves. Pretty much the same policy that has always existed. Not some mythical totalitarian regime, as is being implied.
I remember the original debacle, and I don’t see any “injustice”. Then or now. Just a bunch of hyperbole and some people unhappy with how they think the forums are being moderated.
For example, some of the blogs where this is being discussed (including this one) are moderated. Under what circumstances would you refuse to allow a post? Do you have that right? Why or why not? If I posted comments that were offensive off-topic or otherwise inappropriate? would you allow them all? How about if I continued after being asked repeatedly not to? What if I found a way around moderation and found a way around moderation and robo-spammed your comments? would you inspect each and every one and leave the ones that are OK, or would you simply dump them all? If I posted a bunch of non-spam messages tomorrow, would you be inclined to allow them? What if I continued to do this for days on end? Would you eventually write me off, even at the risk of being compared to a soviet regime?
I would hope so.
@Bruce:
You “suspect”…
Precisely!
You do not know because you cannot see.
But you are not being entirely sincere I suspect, since I *do* know that people have been complaining that posts that do NOT fall into these categories have also been deleted, seemingly for daring to even mention Simon’s name or the project he has been working on (Cross Kylix) – not as a reference to any forum moderation, but simply talking about it. I saw that you were cc’d on an email that I received just this morning from someone asking for our opinion, with some very specific details of posts that had been deleted and which clearly did not violate any forum guidelines.
As for my moderation of these forums, I only delete posts that are obviously spam, and even then I suspect I have given the benefit of the doubt to more spam than I have deleted non-spam by mistake (except in one instance that I can recall where I was over-zealous in pressing the “Delete” button on a comment – but having realised my mistake I posted my own comment apologising for that error and inviting the commenter to repost).
Even if people disagree with me, criticise me or insult me, I allow it, though I do redact offensive language.
If they want to make themselves look bad, who am I to stand in their way?
If I delete their post, they will only be inclined to find some other way to direct their comments, via means that I cannot control.
But why would you choose to abuse my blog in the ways you describe? I suspect that would be the escalation of a poorly managed relationship with you in the first instance and I would be partly to blame for that. If you swamped my comment box it might take me a few days to get around to redacting and approving them all, but I would.
As I said, I would put your folly on public view for others to decide.
But I trust you wont be tempted to test my resolve on that – I have far better things to be doing with my time and in the meantime I hope that by treating my commenters with respect, that they will afford me the same courtesy in return and be more inclined to bless my blog with their visits in the future.
@Jolyon,
Follow-up question.
In the above scenario, what if people re-posted the unwanted messages over and over again or started questioning your ethics or calling you names for repressing poor Bruce? Would you allow those comments?
@Bruce: Follow up answer…
The repostings over again were *CAUSED* BY POSTS BEING DELETED. If the posts weren’t deleted they wouldn’t have been reposted, questions would have been asked about WHY posts were being deleted, people wouldn’t have been incensed at the arrogance of the replies (“You aren’t entitled to anything”) etc etc.
Even if some explanation had been given as to WHY posts were being deleted things might have been better…
It’s easy to see how things spiral when moderation is undertaken in the high handed and arrogant manner adopted by Borcaderoprise…
Someone posts something innocuous and within the rules… it get’s deleted.
Maybe it was deleted by accident…? Poster thinks “Ok, I’ll repost…”
Oh, deleted again.. !!?! Poster thinks: What’s going on? Why are my posts being deleted??!?! Maybe a forum bug, I’ll repost….
Dammit deleted AGAIN, OK I’ll ask what’s going on.
They get either silence or a non-apologetic, stiffly arrogant response (“We don’t discuss moderation policy – you aren’t entitled to an explanation”)
Then the poster get’s REALLY mad….
@Bruce: oh and if someone started calling me names… of course I would allow those posts. It could only help *me* to allow them to make a very public idiot of themselves.
w00t! Wrapped comments to page 2! Page 3 or bust!
Bruce,
I simply refer you back to my 12:23 post on July 28th.
I would be interested to hear how you class that state of affairs as good customer relations ?
Redacting could be as bad as deleting. Suppose the protesting and spamming was because I don’t like the way you edit my language?
I do know what was in some of the posts that were removed. Mostly follow-ups to deleted and reposts of deleted posts. I also don’t have any problem with posts being deleted that are whining about the person in question. Let them whine about moderation on someone else’s server.
I will agree with you on one very specific point. In the case of posts that don’t whine about he who must not be named, make accusations or repost deleted posts, but simply announce CrossKylix (for example), I don’t personally see any reason why these posts should be deleted.
If posts such as this were indeed deleted, then I think that is heavy handed.
What do you think? Common ground?
@Bruce:
If someone really wanted to demonstrate how petty they were by complaining that I had redacted offensive language by doing nothing more than throw more offensive language at me … well, it would be tiresome and tedious but I would much rather be able to point at that specific, demonstrable and incontrovertible behaviour to justify any other actions that I subsequently deemed fit, rather than having to spend yet more time and energy defending my actions to those who believed, rightly OR wrongly, that I had treated the person unfairly.
i.e. if someone really did take offense at my entirely reasonable and even handed moderation and for some that I simply cannot begin to conceive of chose to habitually abuse my site to teach me a lesson for being so reasonable, then yes ultimately I would be forced to seek to find ways to reduce their impact on my time. But any posts that that person managed to sneak around whatever measures I might put in place would *still* be allowed, to demonstrate what a continuing nuisance and fool that person insisted on being.
As for the common ground, yes I believe that is common ground, but I do not believe there is any question whether or not such posts were deleted in this debacle. It seems quite clear to me that they were.
@Joylon,
totally agree with you in those last three posts !
@Jolyon,
We don’t agree on the rest of this, but I’ll take the common ground and leave it at that.
And what’s-his-name can bite my shiny metal [REDACTED].
🙂
@Bruce: LOL (and thanks for the pre-emptive self redacting… it saved me a bit of time 🙂 )
@Joylon
There is no if about it posts merely mentioning the project were cancelled . I saw it with own eyes and in some cases within minutes. Hence all the furore that followed and people asking whats going on ,reposting replies etc etc.
Shortly after this started its was noticable that google indexing of forums apparently stopped occurring. Why ? Who knows 😉