Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 06-24-2014, 07:04 PM
Dewey Finn Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 26,508
You might also want to read the Wikipedia page on Biographies of living persons. I get the impression that Wikipedia is very sensitive to anything that might cause it to be sued.
  #102  
Old 06-24-2014, 07:05 PM
Measure for Measure's Avatar
Measure for Measure Measure for Measure is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Twitter: @MeasureMeasure
Posts: 13,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by gaffa View Post
Wikipedia specifically bans references from forums and blogs. Now if a journalist writes about this situation, that reference could be included.
It just occurred to me that Ed Zotti is an author, editor and journalist. His locked thread can be linked to as authoritative and it can be quoted or characterized directly.
  #103  
Old 06-24-2014, 07:11 PM
Fenris's Avatar
Fenris Fenris is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 13,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shakes View Post
I don't think I've ever been so ashamed to be a Doper.

So you guys get it into your head that MM threatened litigation, so screw him he's unworthy of any sympathy and let's just basically nail him to the wall.

Because reasons.

How fucking petty.
I think the sympathy goes to the guy who left an awards ceremony to be with his dying mom, not the guy who said that he was using his dying mom to drum up sympathy for an award that's usually used to give people a good time to go take a bathroom break.

Note that the internet Wayback Machine has Equipoise's thread archived (and might have the other) and Wikipedia has the basic info there as well.

I'd also note that if MM hadn't threatened Equipoise, this wouldn't have come up again or been an issue, so it's sad to see that bullying people on the internet works.

Also, on behalf of Dan Quayle, I'd like all posts about the "potatoe" thing removed from the SDMB, since there's no doubt that Quayle has learned the correct spelling and "in any case [we] have no desire to prolong his embarrassment indefinitely"
  #104  
Old 06-24-2014, 08:27 PM
Loach's Avatar
Loach Loach is online now
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 24,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merneith View Post
Ed rehashed it, himself. That part is my favorite part.
Fair enough. I retract my statement.
  #105  
Old 06-24-2014, 08:56 PM
DocCathode's Avatar
DocCathode DocCathode is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Philladelphia-Mummer city
Posts: 11,711
Exapno Mapcase said what I was going to say, only more politely.

I feel this sets a bad precedent. Some one can bully a poster, threaten to sue the SDMB, and so get their way.

To Those Who Say The Thread Was Rightly Vanished

Redacted said what he said on video. At that point, he accepted the consequences of his speech and risked the possibility it would follow him forever. He made his bed, and he shouldn't whine when he has to lie in it. People saying negative things based on his speech is one of the myriad consequences he accepted. We weren't being cruel or vindictive when the thread was the top Google result. Redacted did that to himself.
__________________
Nothing is impossible if you can imagine it. That's the wonder of being a scientist!
Prof Hubert Farnsworth, Futurama
  #106  
Old 06-24-2014, 09:23 PM
Mr. Nylock Mr. Nylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Bed
Posts: 2,999
The one thing I would like to know, just for the sake of clarity is this: Are we allowed to mention the name of redacted at all from now on, even if it is not about what happened 7 years ago? He is currently a working celebrity, and also has done things recently which are certainly discussion worthy.

If the answer to the question is no, then we should just stop kidding ourselves that the meat of the matter is a 7 year old thread.

Last edited by Mr. Nylock; 06-24-2014 at 09:25 PM.
  #107  
Old 06-24-2014, 10:06 PM
Accidental Martyr Accidental Martyr is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Nylock View Post
The one thing I would like to know, just for the sake of clarity is this: Are we allowed to mention the name of redacted at all from now on, even if it is not about what happened 7 years ago? He is currently a working celebrity, and also has done things recently which are certainly discussion worthy.

If the answer to the question is no, then we should just stop kidding ourselves that the meat of the matter is a 7 year old thread.
Only if your post is entirely positive and points out what an awesome person he is. If you post anything which might be construed as a negative opinion you might receive a message from him threatening legal action against you.
  #108  
Old 06-24-2014, 10:43 PM
kayaker's Avatar
kayaker kayaker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Western Pennsylvania
Posts: 30,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris View Post
Also, on behalf of Dan Quayle, I'd like all posts about the "potatoe" thing removed from the SDMB, since there's no doubt that Quayle has learned the correct spelling and "in any case [we] have no desire to prolong his embarrassment indefinitely"
Fair enough. I said some funny but hurtful things about Dan's intellect. I retract all those statements. [redacted] remains a dick however.
  #109  
Old 06-24-2014, 11:29 PM
dropzone's Avatar
dropzone dropzone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Posts: 28,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
There are threads like this one, where the OP wondered out loud if obstetric workers should be held responsible for bad parental choices in names: and used a murdered young girl as an example.
As I recall, people disagreed with me. And Google knows you and your interests and habits. It would not have been on the front page for someone who has never looked for or visited the Straight Dope. That's what makes people think they spent their money well when they gave it to a guy whose search engine optimization business is advertised on a grocery store bulletin board. The SDMB is not at the center of the Googleverse.
  #110  
Old 06-24-2014, 11:34 PM
Grrr!'s Avatar
Grrr! Grrr! is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 15,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocCathode View Post
Redacted said what he said on video. At that point, he accepted the consequences of his speech and risked the possibility it would follow him forever. He made his bed, and he shouldn't whine when he has to lie in it. People saying negative things based on his speech is one of the myriad consequences he accepted. We weren't being cruel or vindictive when the thread was the top Google result. Redacted did that to himself.

I'm going to politely disagree with this.

We've all heard how our current laws haven't caught up with modern technology.

Well, IMO, another thing that hasn't caught up with modern technology is our culture. Specifically, the way in which we judge people. Our thinking needs to evolve. If the way in which you judge a person is the same way you were judging a person pre internet days; then that's just wrong.

If this incident would have happened in the 80's, it would have been forgotten about. Sure it would have still been caught on tape, but seven years after the fact, the whole incident would have been little more than a faded memory.
  #111  
Old 06-24-2014, 11:43 PM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia Guinastasia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 51,918
Or maybe Redacted should perhaps remember the old addage: "Don't talk the talk if you can't walk the walk."

And it also doesn't sound like he's changed, if he's blaming people for criticising his behavior, rather than than the behavior that prompted the criticism. That's also something he should consider.

Last edited by Guinastasia; 06-24-2014 at 11:45 PM.
  #112  
Old 06-24-2014, 11:58 PM
gaffa gaffa is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by dropzone View Post
The SDMB is not at the center of the Googleverse.
It is strange how high this particular article showed up in the Google search results for his name.

One can only assume that either some people working on the Google search algorithm are fans of the Straight Dope or that a LOT of people dislike [Redacted] and linked to the article. The other articles are to his workplace, trade magazine articles, etc. and should have ranked much higher.

I've tested the search using different browsers and platforms, in maximum privacy mode, and the results from a Google search were quite consistent. The person in question may really have a long history of obnoxious behavior. Equipoise vented in 2007, came back in 2012 when someone woke the zombie and posted a few responses, then nothing until 2014 when [Redacted] and [Mrs. Redacted] started bigfooting around. It is not as if Equipoise did anything to make the Pitting particularly popular.
  #113  
Old 06-25-2014, 12:09 AM
Baal Houtham Baal Houtham is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Leaky Heart of America
Posts: 2,458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shakes View Post
If this incident would have happened in the 80's, it would have been forgotten about. Sure it would have still been caught on tape, but seven years after the fact, the whole incident would have been little more than a faded memory.
If Micheal Minter is still threatening posters with legal action within the past year, Minter is the one keeping it alive. He's still an asshole.

And since Equipoise probably won't be saying it on SDMB, I'll mentioni that by using some of the search engine links posted earlier in this threat, I learned she's very unhappy about the administration's actions.

And that's all I say about that.
  #114  
Old 06-25-2014, 02:08 AM
Equipoise's Avatar
Equipoise Equipoise is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by hajario View Post
...If there weren't threats of litigation at some point, we wouldn't even be having this discussion and the original thread would never have been locked, let alone deleted...

That's ok though. I think that Ed is actually much more clever than most are giving him credit for. It's my suspicion that Ed was under pressure to do what he did by his management. His explanatory post gives anyone all of the information that they need to Google the name of the person in question and find out the whole story including an archive of the missing thread.

The direct result of all of this is that the sound mixer's story, including in some cases the legal bullying, is now enshrined in at least a couple of reddit threads and on a few other message boards and blog posts. In addition, his Wikipedia page now mentions the incident when it didn't before all of this. Had he let the seven year old thread pass, it's safe to say that many more people would never have heard of it.
*tiptoes in*

Since I'm forbidden to speak my mind and give opinions on all that's been said and done, let me just +1 all three paragraphs here.

*tiptoes out*
  #115  
Old 06-25-2014, 02:45 AM
Merneith Merneith is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: The Group W Bench
Posts: 6,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baal Houtham View Post
If Micheal Minter is still threatening posters with legal action within the past year, Minter is the one keeping it alive. He's still an asshole.
Minkler. Guy's name is Michael Minkler, not Minter.
  #116  
Old 06-25-2014, 06:55 AM
kayaker's Avatar
kayaker kayaker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Western Pennsylvania
Posts: 30,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shakes View Post
If this incident would have happened in the 80's, it would have been forgotten about. Sure it would have still been caught on tape, but seven years after the fact, the whole incident would have been little more than a faded memory.
Kinda like Budd Dwyer in 1987?
  #117  
Old 06-25-2014, 07:09 AM
C K Dexter Haven C K Dexter Haven is offline
Right Hand of the Master
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Chicago north suburb
Posts: 16,078
STRONG MODERATOR WARNING:

Ed had said, "Users are asked to refrain from posting additional comments about this matter.'"

We don't object to a metadiscussion of the wisdom of removing old threads, but we don't want to see a rehashing of the original incident. PLEASE DO NOT POST DETAILS OR NAMES.
  #118  
Old 06-25-2014, 07:45 AM
AaronX AaronX is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 3,469
Yeaah... Because we want to give people a fresh start, and we're not afraid of any lawsuits. That's it.
  #119  
Old 06-25-2014, 07:47 AM
Ranchoth Ranchoth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: The Brink
Posts: 11,361
Thank you for saying "please."
  #120  
Old 06-25-2014, 08:16 AM
drewtwo99 drewtwo99 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 8,757
I think it's surprisingly nice and understanding to even allow a meta-discussion, and I'm really disappointed that others are trying to spoil it by posting names, facts, statements of reality, history, and statements that would fight ignorance.
  #121  
Old 06-25-2014, 08:30 AM
Saint Cad Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 12,817
So if you threaten a lawsuit against an SD poster and then ask nicely you can get a thread taken down? Any word from Ed if this is available to everybody?
  #122  
Old 06-25-2014, 08:43 AM
drewtwo99 drewtwo99 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 8,757
Stop discussing facts "posting additional comments on this matter"!

And Ed said this was a one time deal. So that's a no go for having your "Go to hell and Die, Rosa Parks!" thread hushed up.
  #123  
Old 06-25-2014, 08:48 AM
Shodan Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 37,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
So if you threaten a lawsuit against an SD poster and then ask nicely you can get a thread taken down? Any word from Ed if this is available to everybody?
Only to those who want to put everything behind them and move on. Then wait a few years, contact Ed and threaten lawsuits, and follow up by asking nicely.

Be sure not to mention any names, or rehash the incident.

Regards,
Shodan
  #124  
Old 06-25-2014, 08:51 AM
Grrr!'s Avatar
Grrr! Grrr! is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 15,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayaker View Post
Kinda like Budd Dwyer in 1987?
Good one. I was sure somebody was going to come back with the Hillary Clinton tapes of '74 when I posted that.
  #125  
Old 06-25-2014, 09:00 AM
Loach's Avatar
Loach Loach is online now
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 24,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
So if you threaten a lawsuit against an SD poster and then ask nicely you can get a thread taken down? Any word from Ed if this is available to everybody?
As has been seen before, if you are a poster and threaten legal action it's an instaban. As it should be.
  #126  
Old 06-25-2014, 09:04 AM
kayaker's Avatar
kayaker kayaker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Western Pennsylvania
Posts: 30,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
So if you threaten a lawsuit against an SD poster and then ask nicely you can get a thread taken down? Any word from Ed if this is available to everybody?
Have you read the Oh that Kayaker, he is such a dumbfuck thread?
  #127  
Old 06-25-2014, 09:57 AM
Shodan Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 37,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
As has been seen before, if you are a poster and threaten legal action it's an instaban. As it should be.
And if you are a poster and ask nicely, they will delete a thread wherein you were disparaged. Except they usually don't.

Regards,
Shodan
  #128  
Old 06-25-2014, 10:14 AM
Fenris's Avatar
Fenris Fenris is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 13,175
I'm curious: up 'till right now, there's been an immovable bright-line. "You're a member? Threaten to sue the board? Instaban" rule.

Redacted is a member here http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/member.php?u=159652
He threatened to sue the board.
He was not banned.

DPWhite? Threatened to sue the board because Scylla changed stuff in a quote box (before there was a "Quote Boxes are sancrosanct" rule--I'm pretty sure this is what caused the rule) and DPWhite was instabanned.

Melin (earliest example I can think of) claimed her rep was being smeared by the SDMB because of stuff posted on the usenet(IIRC) and was instabanned (I came in right as she was banned, but that's what I remember--regardless of what she was suing for/about, the threat of a lawsuit=instaban).

KGS was being "defamed" and threatened to sue...he was instabanned

Why is Redacted not banned? What gives him the (literally) unique exemption to the hard and fast, unambiguous rule that "it's been clear for years--even before I became a mod--that threats of lawsuits against the SDMB will earn you a one-way ticket off the island." (from Moderator SkipMagic)?
  #129  
Old 06-25-2014, 10:17 AM
jimbuff314 jimbuff314 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lenapehoking
Posts: 1,659
Some weeks ago, I had posted reference in a similarly-themed thread here in ATMB to this affair expressing concern about alluding to people in the public sphere and whether we (I) could look forward to future threat of legal action if we (I) did so. I take it that it's still okay to do so? I mean, if they get their feelings hurt by it in a few years, we'll (I'll) cross that bridge when those chickens hatch, right?

On an entirely unrelated note, Loach said that if you're a poster and threaten legal action, it's an instaban (I take this to be short for "instant ban"). Is this accurate? If so, I may have transgressed a teeny, tiny bit in my one and only complaint to moderators.

On preview, I see Fenris is concerned as well.
  #130  
Old 06-25-2014, 10:45 AM
Loach's Avatar
Loach Loach is online now
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 24,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris View Post
I'm curious: up 'till right now, there's been an immovable bright-line. "You're a member? Threaten to sue the board? Instaban" rule.

Redacted is a member here http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/member.php?u=159652
He threatened to sue the board.
He was not banned.

DPWhite? Threatened to sue the board because Scylla changed stuff in a quote box (before there was a "Quote Boxes are sancrosanct" rule--I'm pretty sure this is what caused the rule) and DPWhite was instabanned.

Melin (earliest example I can think of) claimed her rep was being smeared by the SDMB because of stuff posted on the usenet(IIRC) and was instabanned (I came in right as she was banned, but that's what I remember--regardless of what she was suing for/about, the threat of a lawsuit=instaban).

KGS was being "defamed" and threatened to sue...he was instabanned

Why is Redacted not banned? What gives him the (literally) unique exemption to the hard and fast, unambiguous rule that "it's been clear for years--even before I became a mod--that threats of lawsuits against the SDMB will earn you a one-way ticket off the island." (from Moderator SkipMagic)?
If that is in fact him it would be a symbolic ban at best. 0 posts. Its not like being banned keeps you from seeing the board.

But yes those other examples confirm my faulty memory. Although I can't find it in writing anywhere as a rule its a good one. The threat tends to be part of an extortion (do what I say or else!). No need to keep those people around.

Just so we are clear on the rules:
Quote:
We reserve the right to delete any message for any or no reason whatsoever.
Its right there in the agreement. Ed could have done it quietly without fanfare but I appreciate that he made it public so opinions could be expressed.
  #131  
Old 06-25-2014, 11:00 AM
AClockworkMelon AClockworkMelon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: The Island of Misfit Toys
Posts: 10,306
Nobody's arguing that they didn't have the right to delete the thread. They could change my username to Loves2Splooge if they wanted.
  #132  
Old 06-25-2014, 11:44 AM
Fenris's Avatar
Fenris Fenris is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 13,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
If that is in fact him it would be a symbolic ban at best. 0 posts. Its not like being banned keeps you from seeing the board.
I'd be ok with a symbolic ban. It would at least be consistent.

Quote:
But yes those other examples confirm my faulty memory. Although I can't find it in writing anywhere as a rule its a good one. The threat tends to be part of an extortion (do what I say or else!). No need to keep those people around.
Look at the last link in my last post--Skipmagic clearly states it as a rule.
  #133  
Old 06-25-2014, 11:57 AM
Exapno Mapcase Exapno Mapcase is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 30,509
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
If that is in fact him it would be a symbolic ban at best. 0 posts. Its not like being banned keeps you from seeing the board.
I'm guessing that all his posts were in that one now disappeared thread. Therefore the post count went down to zero.

As a registered Guest he retains to privilege to post again, maybe here in this discussion thread. I agree that for consistency a ban should be imposed. Although for all we know allowing him the right to return and post to defend his reputation was part of the agreement that the lawyers who should have been consulted and weren't would not have allowed through.

And there's the problem with one-of-a-kind special order exceptions. Say that they don't apply to "A" and pretty soon you're trying to deal with why they don't apply to "B" and "C" and "X".
  #134  
Old 06-25-2014, 12:07 PM
AClockworkMelon AClockworkMelon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: The Island of Misfit Toys
Posts: 10,306
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
I'm guessing that all his posts were in that one now disappeared thread. Therefore the post count went down to zero.
The handle was only created in order to threaten Equipoise, I believe.
  #135  
Old 06-25-2014, 12:13 PM
mhendo mhendo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 24,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by AClockworkMelon View Post
The handle was only created in order to threaten Equipoise, I believe.
Yeah, i don't think he ever actually made a post.
  #136  
Old 06-25-2014, 12:19 PM
kayaker's Avatar
kayaker kayaker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Western Pennsylvania
Posts: 30,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhendo View Post
Yeah, i don't think he ever actually made a post.
Nor did he accept my friend request.
  #137  
Old 06-25-2014, 12:21 PM
Giraffe's Avatar
Giraffe Giraffe is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: ♂ San Jose, CA
Posts: 10,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayaker View Post
Nor did he accept my friend request.
Does anyone?
  #138  
Old 06-25-2014, 12:31 PM
kayaker's Avatar
kayaker kayaker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Western Pennsylvania
Posts: 30,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giraffe View Post
Does anyone?
There's a tear in my beer. Actually,more of a barley-wine.
  #139  
Old 06-25-2014, 12:39 PM
drewtwo99 drewtwo99 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 8,757
The decision to forgive and forget should have been Equipoise's alone. Ed should have consulted her. He should have demanded that Michael apologize to her for his threats and bribes and such if he wanted a chance of having the thread removed from the internet.

I like Crazyhorse's memorial/tribute to the voices that were silenced without consultation.

Of course, I am aware of the "things can be deleted for any reason or no reason," and I do think it's nice Ed even gave us a reason at all. The fact that he rehashed the entire thing was pretty epic and hilarious, to boot.
  #140  
Old 06-25-2014, 12:41 PM
Accidental Martyr Accidental Martyr is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayaker View Post
Nor did he accept my friend request.
He just needs some time to get to know you better.
  #141  
Old 06-25-2014, 12:50 PM
joyfool joyfool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Texas
Posts: 9,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Accidental Martyr View Post
He just needs some time to get to know you better.

Or for you to promise to bury all his negative google results. Real friends get to pet the Oscar that way.
  #142  
Old 06-25-2014, 02:36 PM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia Guinastasia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 51,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by faithfool View Post
Or for you to promise to bury all his negative google results. Real friends get to pet the Oscar that way.
Is that what the kids are calling it nowadays?
  #143  
Old 06-25-2014, 04:24 PM
bup bup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: glenview,il,usa
Posts: 11,905
I hope *this thread* doesn't become the top google hit for Mike Minkler now, what with all the stuff about what a shithead he is.
  #144  
Old 06-25-2014, 04:28 PM
running coach's Avatar
running coach running coach is offline
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 35,461
That's a horrible thing to say about an asshole.

Last edited by C K Dexter Haven; 06-25-2014 at 05:38 PM. Reason: Deleted quote of prior post -- Dex
  #145  
Old 06-25-2014, 04:30 PM
Peter Morris Peter Morris is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The far canal
Posts: 12,135
The deletion didn't even work.

If I Google [Redacted] the thread still comes out near the top of the list. And to view the thread, I just have to look at the cached version. It shows the first page, at least.

So deleting it was pointless. It hasn't hidden the comments. It won't satisfy [redacted]. It won't prevent any actions that [redacted] might make in future.
  #146  
Old 06-25-2014, 05:02 PM
Jonathan Chance Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 21,734
The Moderator Sighs Wearily

Quote:
Originally Posted by kayaker View Post
Have you read the Oh that Kayaker, he is such a dumbfuck thread?
Damn it. You almost got me with this one.

  #147  
Old 06-25-2014, 05:38 PM
gaffa gaffa is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewtwo99 View Post
The decision to forgive and forget should have been Equipoise's alone. Ed should have consulted her. He should have demanded that Michael apologize to her for his threats and bribes and such if he wanted a chance of having the thread removed from the internet.
...and, as I said earlier, the offer of a shiny gold statue as well. Seriously, what does he need three of them for? Two serve perfectly well as bookends.
  #148  
Old 06-25-2014, 05:43 PM
C K Dexter Haven C K Dexter Haven is offline
Right Hand of the Master
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Chicago north suburb
Posts: 16,078
MODERATOR POUNDS GAVEL FOR ATTENTION:

OK, I said very clearly back in Post #117:
Quote:
Originally Posted by C K Dexter Haven View Post
STRONG MODERATOR WARNING:

Ed had said, "Users are asked to refrain from posting additional comments about this matter.'"

We don't object to a metadiscussion of the wisdom of removing old threads, but we don't want to see a rehashing of the original incident. PLEASE DO NOT POST DETAILS OR NAMES.
I have issued an Official Warning to bup for failing to follow moderator instructions (Post #143 above.) And running coach: you didn't help by quoting bup. I have deleted that quote; I'm not issuing an Official Warning for you, but I am offering some friendly advice: Don't.

AS A POSTER: I understand that my instruction was a long time ago, several hours and 30 posts earlier. Still, I assume people read the prior posts before posting themselves? If we need to repeat this instruction every five or six posts, we can do that, but it gets a bit tedious. The other choice is to close this thread. Or y'all could simply focus this discussion on the question of SDMB policies, and NOT on the original incident.

Last edited by C K Dexter Haven; 06-25-2014 at 05:45 PM.
  #149  
Old 06-25-2014, 05:58 PM
GrandWino's Avatar
GrandWino GrandWino is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Evanstonia
Posts: 9,638
So to be clear about the SDMB policy, as long as we have a lawyer write a very nice letter that in no way threatens legal action against the message board, we can have threads removed that impugn our character and also have the mods hand out warnings to anybody that wants to rehash the matter?
  #150  
Old 06-25-2014, 06:04 PM
Marley23 Marley23 is offline
I Am the One Who Bans
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 78,234
Moderating

Quote:
Originally Posted by C K Dexter Haven View Post
MODERATOR POUNDS GAVEL FOR ATTENTION:
It was worth a try. This thread is done.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:09 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017