…I can understand if the OP was a sock or something, or if something happened in the thread to warrant closure, but total disappearance? wha’happened?
Hey, you beat me to it.
IIRC, threads by socks are made to go away. I can’t say for sure that’s what it is, but I will say I’m not surprised.
Most likely a returning guest, trying to eke out a second (or third) guest membership. Gotta be discouraged. Can’t be tolerated. Swatted in toto. That’s the drill.
I think the smell of BS was pretty thick; surely that was the reason.
There’s generally a little more Moderator discretion than that - if a sock-started thread is interesting, well-participated in and remains mostly civil, it’s often allowed to stay open.
However, given the level of the responses by the OP for an “Ask The…” thread, I guess it didn’t pass muster.
Perhaps it was the reason for suspicion anyway. I ask you, if you were, God forbid, going to be a sock, why on EARTH would you start an Ask The…thread on something controversial and interesting? What about Ask the guy who mows his lawn on a Saturday?
Woud you mind waiting until after 7AM before firing up that tractor, pal? Sheesh!
It would be nice if they could retain the thread, but change the OP name to protect the guilty or something.
Why on Earth would you retain a supposedly factual informational thread that was the most fucking obvious piece of fiction in years?
Sometimes they even do it to a normal, non-bs thread, like in Cafe Society. I seem to recall that they discovered someone really normal and non-controversial was a sock and deleted so many threads/posts as a result. I’m not sure, but it may be a relatively new policy.
Any guest who comes up with a thread like the one in question right out of the box is asking to be investigated for sock puppetry, if you ask me.
It was either a sock, non-paying returner or the guest realized they were being a bit too free with personal details re the purported hubby, and asked that it be closed.
Interestingly, my BSoMeter is usually working overtime, and I really didn’t get too much of a BS stink off the nature of the conversation. It seemed to have about the tight mix of pride and hesitancy, and the refusal to get too personal was about what you’d expect. If I was a ploy it had me going.
Well, if it was indeed the most obvious piece of fiction in years, that obvious fiction must’ve occurred after I logged off last night, which is the reason for this thread.
I thought it was major BS right off the bat. I can’t really put my finger on it. You may have noticed, I really grilled the OP. That’s really not me at all. But there were too many details she would have just had us accept on faith, like the prenup.
It was obvious to me from the beginning.
OK I remember the OP being a bit dodgy about some things, but it was more of a “I don’t want to go into it” thing than a “I am making this up out of whole cloth” thing.
Um, hajaro, since you’re so obviously brilliant at spotting fakes, could you maybe provide some specific detail, or is it a trade secret? :rolleyes:
We all have internal bullshit meters. That thread made mine nearly explode. What’s your problem, dude? Do you think that I’m lying about spotting the OP as a faker?
Okay, so I was thinking about why I felt the thread in question might be not at face value and here’s what I’ve come up with. It’s not proof, mind you, and I could totally be wrong, but I got a vibe that the writer was younger than she was claiming; her style had a taste of high school fiction writing. That and the fact that I just really think people who make Ask The…threads should be far more open. Plus, where are there prenuptial agreements that have not been drawn up by attornies that neither party can break? I’ll tell you where: fantasyland.
Also, here’s an American woman in a very liberal Protestant denomination who decides she’ll “marry” a married man because it’s better than committing adultry when, in actual fact, it is adultry because the marriage is, as she well knows, not legal. It’s almost like science fiction for sociologists.
If this was a novel or a movie, anyone would be like “But, wait, what about… And…and…But I thought…”
OK. Obviously, I don’t have the thread for reference anymore but the first thing that set off warning bells for me is a new Guest posting an “Ask the…” thread about something potentially controversial. After reading the first page of questions and replies, the whole thing lacked credibility to me. I just couldn’t see her supposed situation playing out the way that it did. Too much of it didn’t make sense.
I’m sorry that you got played. I’ve certainly been fooled before too.
No, not at all; you say you thought it was BS the whole time (bully for you), but did not elaborate on exactly why you thought so. It seemed to me that the thread was going along civilly enough last night before I signed off, then when I looked for it this morning, it was gone, with no explanation. I honestly don’t think I’m being obtuse by asking for specifics; sorry if you are offended by that.
When we ban a troll or sock, we usually delete all their posts. These are jerks who have fun causing trouble (one way or another), and the only real way to de-motivate them is to let them know that their posts will disappear.
We don’t really encourage discussion, either, for the same reason. A troll gets jollies from being disruptive, and getting attention (however negative.) We don’t want to give them that attention.
If a long-term poster gets banned or there is some justification for letting y’all know the reason that a post disappeared, we’ll tell you. If you feel a compelling need to know, please email any moderator, and we’ll be glad to explain (assuming it’s not a violation of the banned person’s privacy.) But, please, don’t start threads discussing trolls – that’s what they want. Don’t play into their hands.
Don’t respond to requests to hold millions of dollars from Nigeria, either.
Please see SDMB Rules and note especially Rule #6.
Arky, you been around long enough to know this.
Anyone who desparately needs more info, please email a moderator.