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? 
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.
That’s a horrible thing to say about an asshole.
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.
Damn it. You almost got me with this one.
…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.
MODERATOR POUNDS GAVEL FOR ATTENTION:
OK, I said very clearly back in Post #117:
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.
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?
It was worth a try. This thread is done.
ust to be clear: it has always been general policy that we don’t remove threads, but that we make exceptions in exceptional cases. There have been several such over the years, most of them just don’t come to public attention since the whole point is to DAMPEN the topic.
The instruction was very clear that the question of thread removal can be discussed; the seven-year old idiocy cannot. We allowed three pages of pretty much leniency, until someone decided to use the specific name. That crossed the line.