Yesterday a poster in this forum alerted three or four of my posts in one thread and the moderator removed them.
I’ve been here a long time and I know when I see a post which breaks forum guidelines. These posts did not break the forum guidelines nor the site ToS but I’m not complaining about the moderator as they don’t have time to read through long posts.
There is something more interesting going on. Despite threads containing some nasty rhetoric, people being call all sorts of names from heretics to idiots to liars, I’ve rarely seen posts removed in this forum. I’ve seen posters spamming up threads to try to bury dissent, I’ve seen repeat posting of OPs, I’ve seen posters returning as other users, (which is highly against the rules), but posts don’t get deleted for one simple reason… in this forum we rarely if ever alert posts. It’s not a rule it’s just a sense of forum etiquette we seem to have adopted in here.
But yesterday that all changed when a certain poster started alerting a post of mine, a statement, which he didn’t like and got at least three of my posts removed. I had no notification from the moderator as to why, so clearly they weren’t concerned.
So, this is how it going to be now is it? That genie is now out of the bottle! (that’s a metaphor by the way). OK well we now join the ranks of the other forums where this sort of thing occurs all the time, and is considered permissible, fair play.
But the question for me is why”? Why did this person who to my knowledge has never alerted content before, suddenly alert these posts.
Frustration? Or was it fear of the words themselves.
I wonder.
@divegeester saidI'm sorry you feel this way. I don't see how a suggestion to improve your game and rating can be classified as an "attack" As I said earlier, this is a chess site after all.
This post by you is off topic and I consider it a personal attack; I’ve alerted it accordingly.
@mchill saidPlease stop posting off topic as it firmly against the forum rules and also badgering me about my chess ability as this is also passive-aggressive harassment.
I'm sorry you feel this way. I don't see how a suggestion to improve your game and rating can be classified as an "attack" As I said earlier, this is a chess site after all.
PS Welcome to the new world.
Yesterday a poster in this forum alerted three or four of my posts in one thread and the moderator removed them.
Without reading the rest of your post - It was not me, sonship, who alerted your posts.
Unless you have some proof I was the source (in case it was accidental) I have no knowledge of intentionally doing that.
@sonship saidFor what it's worth, as you have repeatedly accused me of being a liar on this forum [when you've been bent out of shape] while refusing to cite any specific example, I find myself unable to simply take your word for it.
Without reading the rest of your post - It was not me, sonship, who alerted your posts.
@sonship saidYes, I have acknowledged this and apologised to you in the other thread. I write this for the benefit of others who may not have seen that.
@divegeesterYesterday a poster in this forum alerted three or four of my posts in one thread and the moderator removed them.
Without reading the rest of your post - It was not me, sonship, who alerted your posts.
Unless you have some proof I was the source (in case it was accidental) I have no knowledge of intentionally doing that.
Nevertheless, the serious point in my OP remains. We should be wary of allowing the silliness and underhand tactics of the other forums to permeate this one.
@fmf saidYou and I are frequently accused of collusion or backing one another up. On this occasion I must point out that I disagree with you, I have chosen to believe sonship on this matter.
For what it's worth, as you have repeatedly accused me of being a liar on this forum [when you've been bent out of shape] while refusing to cite any specific example, I find myself unable to simply take your word for it.
@fmf saidThis is more likely in my mind; and I know who it would be.
If it was someone who was not involved in the conversation and who did not post to say what the objection was, then this is a bizarre development. Was it someone who saw themselves as "coming to sonship's rescue", I wonder.
@mchill saidYou seem to have a hit and run tactic in both this and the GF and are probably my least favourite poster. In this forum you created a particularly weak and childlike thread about why atheists should become theists and in the GF showed your complete ignorance of the British Royal family and posted offensively. (Whether you realized it or not).
I'm sorry you feel this way. I don't see how a suggestion to improve your game and rating can be classified as an "attack" As I said earlier, this is a chess site after all.
So perhaps it is you who should take a break from the forums and work a little on your intelligence and posting style.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidHear hear!
You seem to have a hit and run tactic in both this and the GF and are probably my least favourite poster. In this forum you created a particularly weak and childlike thread about why atheists should become theists and in the GF showed your complete ignorance of the British Royal family and posted offensively. (Whether you realized it or not).
So perhaps it is you who should take a break from the forums and work a little on your intelligence and posting style.