Actually, you’re right, and I apologise. I also agree with you … if I’m reading you right, this time!
Incidentally, you have two shift keys and a caps lock.
Maybe he lost his pinkies in a prison riot. 
No details, please. Keep the thread open.
I figured it might be because someone may say too much and then someone else may get wind of that and then start harassing said person on that person’s blog.
Or something like that, I’m vague on details.
Metacom, what I meat when discussing the involvement of lawyers was a direct reference to this:
Ain’t continuity grand? Using it, you can reference earlier parts of the thread!
With me now?
fubbleskag, this quote:
might be accurate if the SDMB were a government entity or if you had any right to free speech here, which you don’t.
If the moderators want to close down any thread in which the second sentences of the first and fifth posts don’t rhyme, they can do it. They can pick any arbitrary and capricious reason for closing a thread and there is sweet fuck-all you can do about it, except decide not to continue paying them to mess with you. You could TRY suing, I suppose, but I’m not sure how you’d go about doing that, or even if you’d find an attorney who could stop laughing long enough to file on your behalf.
The moderators have a policy regarding things that might involve a bunch of extra work on their part. Is it a well defined one? Maybe not. But *must it be * well-defined? No.
You have every right to disagree with the policy. But to imply that you have some right to read a thread here or that they have some obligation to provide it to you is ridiculous on its face.
How so? This is a private message board. If they felt like it, they could censor any post that didn’t directly relate to a column.
Hell, they could censor it so that every post were only one word long. As samclem said, Their board, their rules, their call.
No, because the lawyers were going after the poster, not the SDMB, which is what you were implying. Isn’t being able to actually understand earlier parts of the thread grand?
Actually, there is something I can do. Politely complain, and voice my opinion. I can’t force them to change their minds or their policies, but they clearly do listen to the users and sometimes even act on user suggestions.
You understand they’re protecting themselves, right? If there was no chance of liability on their parts, I’m sure they’d let you post anything you wanted.
Er, according to what the mods have said so far, they’re not closing the thread to protect themselves, they’re closing them to protect the users.
Protecting themselves from what, exactly?
Here’s the way I see it. It ain’t the legal aspect, it’s the pain-in-the-ass aspect. I’ve seen any number of threads where someone has posted something along the lines of “Oh my god did I really post that? Oh my god oh my god delete it delete it delete it delete it oh why won’t you delete it I really didn’t mean to post that I wasn’t thinking oh god delete it delete it delete it DELETE IT!!! AIIIIII!!!” And that’s just what’s made it to the boards. I’d imagine they get a shitload of emails like that all the f***ing time. It just gets to be a pain in the ass to deal with, so if they can head it off to begin with, all the better.
So you see, it’s not a matter of “censorship” or legality, it’s just a tool to make the mods lives somewhat less hassle. That’s my two cents worth, anyway.
And, when they go after the poster, what do they do?
Oh, yes!
They subpoena the information!
In context!
Meaning work for WHOM?
The SDMB!
It is!
Maybe someday you will, too!
Yes yes, I’m sure the hundreds of lawsuits currently leveled against posters who revealed too much information about themselves here are causing the mods hours and hours of extra work.
Do you have a cite that this actually happens? That having to serve subpoenas is a problem for the SDMB? And how the hell is a discussion about past experiences in jail and prison likely to lead to such a subpoena? Presumably, jail and prison time are already known about, being a matter of public record; it’s beyond me how discussing it could lead to the SDMB being subpoenad.
Exactly. If the SDMB is being used as an extensive source of evidence in trials, maybe we should just ban all discussions of reality?
For the record, I’m not really a human. I’m a sentient goat living in the lush forests of Greenland. I access the SDMB telepathically, using the awesome powers of my capricious little mind.
Take THAT evil lawyers!
Metacom, you don’t get it.
I don’t need a cite that it actually happens, since I’m not arguing that it actually happens.
I need a cite that the moderators worry that things like this happen, since that is the point I am arguing.
And I have that. Post #8, by TubaDiva.
The issue is that, in posting sensitive information of this type, posters might cause problems that may cause issues for the SDMB.
In recognition of this possibility, the mods are preemptively closing threads likely to cause such situations to arise.
It’s not precognition. It’s not hard-and-fast. But it’s their policy, and their prerogative. They can do what they wanna do. They made this money, you didn’t. Right, Ted?
Happy Scrappy Hero Pup, I think it’s possible that someone might interpret your post as an order to kill their children. In light of this possibility I formally request that the moderators delete this thread, ban you, and report you to the FBI. It’s my perrogative.
Then that’s just stupid. Potentially interesting threads are being closed down because something bad might possibly happen sometime in the potential future?
What they are doing, with no mays, possiblities or mights is creating more work for themselves in the present for a policy that harms the boards by further limiting topics that can be discussed.
FUCK! Now I’ve got sticky ass Dr. Pepper all over me. That shit burns when it comes out your nose.
Thanks for the laugh though.
I just wonder where the line will be drawn here at SDMB.
Certainly threads talking about problems with children could end up in family court. Ditto marital problems. Dare anyone post about work issues? It could get litigated, and postings used for internal investigation/discipline hearings. Posting about struggles with drugs and/or alcohol? Might end up used against you. And so on, and so forth.
So, is it best to remove all personal context from one’s postings?
You’ve probably never gone through the discovery portion of a lawsuit. I have. It’s basically “Give us everything you have on X.” It wouldn’t just be the messages. It would be any e-mail on X (for every admin/moderator/staff member), notes of phone conversations on X, any meeting notes on X, any postal mail on X, and so on and so on.
So it’s not just giving the lawyer the thread in question. It’s going through everything you have to see if anything deals with X. It’s a lot of work.