Deletion discussion

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I feel quite confident in being able to say that there is, always has been, and always will, that room here.

[anthriel]

I feel quite confident in being able to say that there is, always has been, and always will, that room here.

As I said way back on page one, if we were all alike, it would be a pretty boring board. I am very glad there is room for all of us, here.

[Cerin]

I'd say the same about your labeling this as "disrespectful". In both cases this is a problem with your perceptions, not with reality. Nobody else should be expected to change their behavior because your perceptions are flatly wrong.

I've not labeled deleting as disrespectful in the sense of declaring it so; I've said (or meant to say) that it seems so to me, in effect (not intent). You've had no trouble saying that you disagree, and that's fine. That's what we're here to do, as I understand it -- state how we see things -- which doesn't mean we think everyone must or even ought to see them that way!

So there is no problem with my perceptions; they are, as you rightly say, mine. I haven't suggested that anyone should change their behavior, I'm simply explaining my behavior with regard to posting, how I regard the process.

If someone expresses frustration over people deleting posts, and others read that as an admonition, I think that interpretation is largely the interpreter's responsibility. I have seen nothing here worded strongly enough to be taken as an admonition or insistence that people change their behavior, but apparently more tenderhearted souls took it as a chiding. You can't help how people respond to your posts; all you can do, is do your best to clarify your intent when confusion arises. If someone limits their own posting in concern for the feelings of others, that should be seen as their own choice, and not blamed on the people they feel obligated to protect.

To my eyes, what yov describes is EXACTLY what Jewel has been implying all along. IMHO.

And if we really all do have the right to feel as we feel, and post according to our comfort level, and we are "pretty sure" we all understand that... well, then there needs to be room here for the retreaters. The ones who post and then worry. THAT IS WHO THEY ARE. That is their comfort level.

There is room for the retreaters! By all means, retreat if that's what makes you comfortable! And proudly retreat, and explain your retreating (if you like) when others say they wish you didn't (I think that's basically what happened, isn't it?). But if you're saying you think merely mentioning the subject equates to not allowing you to be yourself, I can't agree.

On another messageboard, I was told that my strongly expressed dislike of something equated to a strong disliking also, of everyone who liked the thing I disliked. That if I disliked a thing they liked, I disliked them as well as the thing. I know that for myself, this is certainly untrue.

[nerdanel]

Your repeated insistence that people should post and behave the way that you want them to is far more irritating to me than any deleted post I can recall on this board.

I haven't seen Jewel doing this. As I see it, she has been expressing a concern that people were censoring themselves.

I'd say her calls of "dishonesty" and "passive aggressive" went well beyond "expressing a concern" about self-censoring. I'd say the same about your labeling this as "disrespectful". In both cases this is a problem with your perceptions, not with reality. Nobody else should be expected to change their behavior because your perceptions are flatly wrong.

To be clear, since I reintroduced the term "dishonesty" into the discussion, I believe that came from Alatar rather than JS (see his post on page 2).

I agree with all of this, which is why I think posting is not at all like conversation. Perhaps that's the crux of the issue. If you treat posting like conversation (which it is unlike in so many ways), I can see that you might have reason to do quite a bit of deleting.

I thought about this for a few hours. I do participate in other boards sporadically and completely anonymously. Only one facet of my personality or interests is on display (e.g., swimming, tea, dating issues, etc.) When this is the case, I am fine with putting my words out there without editing and I am comfortable with board policies that (via technology) limit after-the-fact editing. Needless to say, I choose to share far, far less on those boards and I only post in a way that will not reveal who I am. In these messageboards, I am not having a conversation with people I know as people: I am a screenname putting forth ideas for other screennames to consider, about the ideal steeping time for oolong tea or a promising breaststroke drill or pitfalls of early-stage non-exclusive dating. Under these circumstances, editing is not necessary, and any self-censoring occurs before the fact.

b77 and then HoF have been different for me, because we have moved over the past eight years from partial anonymity to complete non-anonymity. With respect to almost everyone on this board, I know their full names and what they look like; I've shared meals with many (most?); spent time in people's houses and met their kids; and shared virtually in their triumphs and tribulations (and vice versa) for a very long time. Under these circumstances, when I post here, I do perceive myself to be in conversation with a community of people whom I know personally. I understand that some of those conversations are publicly viewable, and that has never been my preference. (I was in the small minority that wanted b77 never to become a public board, because I preferred the intimacy of posting amidst a smaller community of "knowns"). I would prefer to be posting to a closed audience, and I am thinking primarily of our registered and active posters as my audience when I make my posts. I understand, of course, that that's not the case - and that disconnect between whom I'm speaking to (i.e. registered members, who are the only people who will respond to my posts) and who else can view our conversation - is another reason that I edit some of my posts. That is, I'd be comfortable with leaving the post up for the narrower audience, but not the broader, silent audience who may at some point come across the post. In a couple of special cases, I've actually made posts that I knew in advance I was only going to leave on the board for 24-48 hours after making them, because they really were only intended for the eyes of people who were immediately participating in that discussion (e.g., I shared some very personal experiences with childhood abuse in a thread (I think regarding parenting issues) years ago. I shared those experiences because they were relevant to the thread and I was comfortable with active posters seeing them, but I certainly did not feel obligated to leave them posted for anyone else who might happen upon this board for years to come. If anyone would term this "disrespectful," "passive-aggressive," or "dishonest"...well, I got nothing. Our frames of references are just too different.)

To all of this, one unsympathetic response from diehard non-editers might be: "Too bad. If you aren't confident you can leave your post up before you make it, you should never post those things in the first place." But this is ironic, because the anti-editers are campaigning against people restricting their sharing of information and ideas on the boards, but their approach will simply lead to less information shared in the first place - an even more limited exchange of ideas.

. The comforting notion that edit/delete allows us to retrieve our words is somewhat illusory, since we don't know who might have quoted and saved them for reply, nor how they may have taken flight in the ether or cemented themselves in the minds of others.

Of course this is true. However, it is undeniable that edit/delete DOES partially restrict the availability of the posts in question, and that is the reason that we exercise the option even if our posts cannot be fully recalled. If edit/delete did not have the effect of partially retrieving the posts in question, we would not be having this discussion.

But I think deleting posts in their entirety after the fact is inherently disrespectful of the conversations and community in which they took place -- of the reality and value of those interactions at that time -- even if the deleter intends no disrespect.

The key is "at that time." In determining that the posts will not be available to all members of the public for all time, the editer does not disrespect the value of those conversations amongst the original participants at the time the original conversation occurred, any more than a participant in a real-time conversation disrespects the value of that conversation by declining to make an audio-recording or transcript of that conversation publicly available for all to read.

ETA crossposted with Cerin

[JewelSong]

Huh.

Well, I guess I've been told off well and proper. I figured that since this was a thread (in Lasto!) actually devoted to discussing deleting of posts, I could...we could..actually discuss deletion of posts.. Because that was the purpose of thread. To talk about this issue. And people's differing perceptions of it.

And I thought it was a pretty good discussion, with lots of differing viewpoints and opinions and ways of looking at reasons why people might or might not delete their posts. Not surprisingly, there was some disagreement and some intense feelings about the issue. Which is what Lasto is for and which is what often makes for a good discussion. In my opinion, anyway. I learned a great deal about how other people feel when they post and why someone might choose to delete a post that seems perfectly harmless.

So being told to "get over it" because my perceptions are "flatly wrong" is a little...upsetting? Puzzling? Contrary to the reason for the thread's existence in the first place?

Sorry I irritated you, yovargas. Maybe you should simply skip over my posts since they are so annoying to you and "get over it" yourself.

Anthy, it is obvious that this entire discussion has deeply upset you and that was never my intent. I am sorry I ever brought the whole deletion issue up. In spite of the interesting dialogue that (I thought) all of us were having, it seems the topic was - I don't know - inappropriate.

Cerin said it best a couple of pages back. This board is not conducive for dialogue or discussion of issues where people hold strongly differing opinions.

Which, in my view, is too bad...but again, that is only my perception. It is what it is and I won't make any more noise about it.

EDIT: Cross-posted with several people!

[WampusCat]

It distresses me that not responding to a post is interpreted as judging it harshly. Sometimes, particularly when a post is deep and heartfelt, I need to let it sink in. I need to think about how I want to respond rather than shooting off the first thing that comes to mind.

(I read once that extroverts must talk to know what they think, while introverts must think to know what to say.)

Sometimes, by the time I've thought it through, the conversation has moved on or I wonder if it would make the poster uncomfortable to have it brought up again. Or I forget.

I keep pretty close tabs on this board, and I have never seen a post by any of you that made me shake my head in disgust that anyone would post such a thing. You are all interesting people, amazing in your varied talents and opinions. Call me greedy, but I just want more of all of you, not less.

That said, though, everyone should be allowed to edit their own posts as they see fit. That's only fair.

[Alatar]

I was indeed the person who used the word dishonest. That's how it feels to me. But please, when people are quoting me, don't do it selectively. I also said: "Unless its sharing personal information that you want shared temporarily".

Like anything, there are no hard and fast rules for this, but there is a tendency here to, I dunno, what's the opposite of a strawman? Where you hold up an exception that's self evident, and then suggest that its the norm? For example, I don't believe anyone should insist that I leave my personal phone number in the M00t thread, or that Nel should leave her childhood experiences open to all. That's not the kind of deleting that people are referring to. The 90-95% (all figures invented) of posts that get/got deleted were mid-thread of a conversation cause somebody said something that they either thought better of / were embarassed by / changed their mind about. That's not the same thing.

As I said in my post, if it were up to me I'd remove the Delete button. If you felt strongly enough about deleting a post you would have to get a mod to do it for you. I think even that would limit the knee-jerk tendency to delete.

And no, I won't apologise for my beliefs on this. And yes, if I have to, I absolutely will "Get. Over. It". I'm not crying myself to sleep at night over edited and deleted posts. But in this forum, in this thread, I will state my opinion and preference.

[Pearly Di]

and to Jewel.

Cerin said it best a couple of pages back. This board is not conducive for dialogue or discussion of issues where people hold strongly differing opinions.

Very few boards are, IMO.

Internet kerfuffles always result when people express strong opinions.

If folk don't want to engage with something controversial, then clearly a particular forum is not the right place for such. And other forums are.
So I guess people can take their pick.

I pretty much share Cerin's view of internet exchanges - that messageboards are primarily places where I share ideas - and that's even after I have made some great RL friends from my various online communities over the years. Call it an adoptee's natural tendency to detach.

That's not to say that I don't also regard some forums as places of support. That has happened on HoF too, and I'm grateful for it.

P.S. And, hey ... bitter, TMI posts are always fun to read, people. Says the wicked side of Pearl. Being serious now ... that's all part of the rich human condition too.

[yovargas]

Sorry I mis-attributed your statements, Al. I should've gone back and checked that.

[Nin]

THAT IS WHO THEY ARE. That is their comfort level. That's it. If people don't like it, they need to skip over it and move on.

You know that this argument works both sides? Because if the comfort level for others is to feel shut out by regularly deleted posts - well what can they do?

Well, just two cents from someone who posts from a different time zone: It happens quite regularly that you pick up conversations again after what has been a busy conversation moment in he dominant time zone of the boards - and you find a discussion only incomplete, with deleted or edited posts which don't allow you any more to know exactly what has been said and which make it impossible to really make a statement yourself. It is utterly frustrating - and I am not talking about time frames of 24 or 48 hours.

I also wanted to add a personal experience: ever since I found out once in the current of a thread that some posters on this board can not only edit their posts and even edit them out, but entirely and completely delete them as they had never been there, even after other posters have answered - I never posted alike again. It showed to me very much that there is a double standard. Of course I knew that those are the rules of this board. But to be so bluntly confronted to it has changed my view of what people are here to each other definately and impacted the trust I had.

Well, you cannot have it both ways, I think.

I am also of those who think that if noone answers, it means disinterest. Because some people always get answers, always, whatever they say.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

As I said in my post, if it were up to me I'd remove the Delete button. If you felt strongly enough about deleting a post you would have to get a mod to do it for you. I think even that would limit the knee-jerk tendency to delete.

The Delete button only exists on this board when no posts have been made in response. So no one is deleting posts in the middle of conversations.

[Nin]

The Delete button only exists on this board when no posts have been made in response. So no one is deleting posts in the middle of conversations.

This is only true for the ordinary poster, not for everyone.

And totally editing out the text in a post is just like deleting it.

[JewelSong]

Sorry I mis-attributed your statements, Al. I should've gone back and checked that.

And maybe not accused ME of something I hadn't actually said? Or stated that I was the "only one" who felt a certain way when I obviously am not?

I find that somewhat...irritating.

Also, I agree with Nin.

[Cerin]

nel, thanks for your expansive thoughts on the subject of posting! I am happy to restrict the scope of my deletion remarks to a more public sort of board. I do realize that this community has become quite close, and I agree that in some respects it would make more sense to have it be a closed board. My deletion comments really aren't applicable to the kind of personal conversation you describe. When I speak in general about posting, it's with a more public environment in mind.

But this is ironic, because the anti-editers are campaigning against people restricting their sharing of information and ideas on the boards, but their approach will simply lead to less information shared in the first place - an even more limited exchange of ideas.

I want to be clear that when I express opinions of this sort, they aren't in the nature of a campaign. I don't think anyone here should change the way they post to please anyone else, and I wouldn't expect them to do so, nor would I want them to. I think it's important that people understand that if someone speaks enthusiastically about their own point of view, it shouldn't necessarily be taken to imply they think others should adopt it.


Jewel, I'm glad you brought the subject up. I think it's been a useful discussion.

[River]

As I said in my post, if it were up to me I'd remove the Delete button. If you felt strongly enough about deleting a post you would have to get a mod to do it for you. I think even that would limit the knee-jerk tendency to delete.

The Delete button only exists on this board when no posts have been made in response. So no one is deleting posts in the middle of conversations.

Really? I've never seen it. Testing...

ETA: Spotted!

[anthriel]

I think yov deserves to be able to state his opinion, too. Everyone is stating their opinion, here.

To all of this, one unsympathetic response from diehard non-editers might be: "Too bad. If you aren't confident you can leave your post up before you make it, you should never post those things in the first place." But this is ironic, because the anti-editers are campaigning against people restricting their sharing of information and ideas on the boards, but their approach will simply lead to less information shared in the first place - an even more limited exchange of ideas.

I think this is a very important point, which may be being overlooked, here. Well said, nel.



Wampus: It doesn't happen often, that feeling of ARGGHH!! No one is responding to me! It must be a Very Bad Post!

But when it does (at least for me), I never fault anyone for not answering; I fault myself for writing an unanswerable post. In fact, that is just the point: if I am a bit worried that what I post may be Too Much, then the fact no one follows it is often because it was... well, Too Much. Not your fault. Mine.

To my eyes, what yov describes is EXACTLY what Jewel has been implying all along. IMHO.

And if we really all do have the right to feel as we feel, and post according to our comfort level, and we are "pretty sure" we all understand that... well, then there needs to be room here for the retreaters. The ones who post and then worry. THAT IS WHO THEY ARE. That is their comfort level.

There is room for the retreaters! By all means, retreat if that's what makes you comfortable! And proudly retreat, and explain your retreating (if you like) when others say they wish you didn't (I think that's basically what happened, isn't it?). But if you're saying you think merely mentioning the subject equates to not allowing you to be yourself, I can't agree.

I think the words posted here go well beyond just "mentioning the subject". That phrase really downplays some of the words shared here.

Imp says she felt shamed for being ashamed. I agree. Many of the earlier posts in this thread really were jarring, to those of us "tenderhearted souls" (why do I not believe that to be an attribute, in this sentence? ) to whom these words apply.

Look, I'm not saying deleting one's ideas is a good practice. I have gone back to b77 recently to look up some of vison's old thoughts (thank GOD she wasn't a deleter), and ran into many threads where apparently very important posts had been deleted. YES, it is frustrating. YES, I get it. I don't love it either. (Interesting, MANY of those ellipse-leaving deletions were made by our very own Jewel, who even deleted out the name of a thread, in one instance. I thought that was kind of ironic. )

Anthy, it is obvious that this entire discussion has deeply upset you and that was never my intent. I am sorry I ever brought the whole deletion issue up. In spite of the interesting dialogue that (I thought) all of us were having, it seems the topic was - I don't know - inappropriate.

Jewel: I don't feel deeply upset, actually. This thread wasn't inappropriate; it was probably more like High Time. I feel like I got a good shot to the mug, and I certainly needed it. I have learned a lot from this thread, and if much of it was painful, that's on me. I was the one with the bad habit.

No, I feel more embarrassed, not only that my (really quite former) habit was such an issue for some people, and that I guess I was putting my head in the sand about the effects it had; I also feel embarrassed that I have shared so many of my personal thoughts here. Yes, I know this is just the kind of sentence that you were talking about, but at least I didn't delete, or more correctly edit, my posts. That little safety valve for me is gone, now. I'm flying without a net. It's up to me to figure out if flying is worth it.

I can't help how I feel. But I can change what I DO.



Here's what I got from this thread: if I am upsetting you (the greater you) I need to STOP. I don't really have to post anything OTHER than kitty pictures, and I actually got a PM from Sassy one time, where she didn't like my kitty picture. She thought the cat looked distressed, and that distressed her.

I didn't agree, but I took it down. You people matter to me, dammit. I'm sorry about that; it just is what it is. If I am upsetting people with this habit, I will change it. If I get posts like the one I got from Frelga in this thread, I will CHANGE what I am doing.

Frelga is important to me. Jewel is important to me. Al is important to me. Di and narya and Prim and yov and SirV and SirDennis and Cerin and Lali and elsha and River and nel and Imp and so, so many people here. Important.

Perhaps I should see you all as only imaginary friends, two-dimensional streams of words which only exist when I get around to booting up the computer, but all y'all have ALWAYS been more than that to me. (Okay, here I go with the "I love you guys" stuff again. Oy. Jeez, Houston, we so have a problem... )

I know I'm not a good Lasto person. I probably am not a particularly good messageboard person. I'm not good, never have been, at the distant cut-and-parry that so many enjoy. I have broken Al's definitons about what kind of deleting is okay, and so therefore he sees what I do as dishonest. (Right, Al? Is that a fair summary of your post?)

I can't have that, really. I am not dishonest, and I want you all to see ME when you see what I post. Do you see what I'm saying? If that habit makes Al believe that I am a dishonest person, I need to knock it off. I can change. I am trainable.

I do tend to listen to what you say. Shouldn't I?

[yovargas]

I don't really have to post anything OTHER than kitty pictures, and I actually got a PM from Sassy one time, where she didn't like my kitty picture.

Okay, seriously, I LOL'd at that.

I do tend to listen to what you say. Shouldn't I?

Listen? Sure. Doesn't mean you have to comply to everything and everyone! I mean, what do you do if putting up that kitty pic upset one person and taking it down upset someone else??

[JewelSong]

I think yov deserves to be able to state his opinion, too.

Of course he can state his opinion. But when there is a discussion going on about a hot-button topic and there are people on both sides (and in the middle) of said topic, it is patently unfair and kind of nasty to be told that you are the ONE AND ONLY person who feels a certain way, nobody else feels that way and you are irritating and you should just "let it go."

In the very thread that is designed to discuss the topic. In Lasto, which is the forum for discussion of hot-button topics.

Seriously.

(And B77 had a different....shall we say..."vibe" than HoF. Things were a lot more volatile and many more posts got edited out after much personal mudslinging. That is not the case here. Quite the opposite.)

[anthriel]

I don't really have to post anything OTHER than kitty pictures, and I actually got a PM from Sassy one time, where she didn't like my kitty picture.

Okay, seriously, I LOL'd at that.

'Tis true. Our Sass was a very strong animal advocate. Miss her.

I do tend to listen to what you say. Shouldn't I?

Listen? Sure. Doesn't mean you have to comply to everything and everyone! I mean, what do you do if putting up that kitty pic upset one person and taking it down upset someone else??

[/quote]


Well, that's the nightmare of the thing... I clearly can't please everyone. What I can do, however, is try not to actively UPSET anyone. I will fall short, but that's the goal.

And I know it sounds like I'm "listening" to some voices more than others, here. I do appreciate those of you who put up with me even when I wasn't so well behaved. You guys rock like giant rock-like things.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I do tend to listen to what you say. Shouldn't I?

Okay, than listen to what I have to say. You upset at least as many people by refraining from posting more than kitteh pictures out of the fear that you might possibly feel the need to edit some of what you write (and with you, we are really talking about editing, not deleting, because I can't recall a single post where you just left a three dot place holder, unlike many others), as you do when you edit (I would actually guess that it is far more people, but I don't have sufficient objective evidence of that to satisfy a board full of geeks). It's just that the people that are upset editing tend to be more vocal about it, and use stronger language in expressing themselves about. I think it is more accurate to say that you have changed your posting in order to satisfy those people who are more vocal, and use stronger language. That certainly is your choice to make, and I certainly don't question your right to make it. But don't say that you are doing it to avoid upsetting people overall, because that simply isn't accurate.

Edit: Cross-posted with anthriel. Obviously.