Who is deleting / editing Posts ??

[diamondnostril]

I noticed over the last 2 days that several Posts have disappeared from threads.

I noticed this on the threads:
http://www.diabetes.co.uk/forum/threads/getting-bloods-under-7-0mmol.85501
http://www.diabetes.co.uk/forum/threads/are-you-calculating-something-right-now.85684

One of these disappeared Posts was from a member who was complaining that a previous Post of theirs had been edited by somebody. After a little while, this Post containing the complaint disappeared.

Today I notice on the "getting-bloods-under-7-0mmol" thread that one of the Posts has been edited, to remove a comment and to remove its quote of another Post which is now missing.

What's going on?? On the threads, there is no information that a Post has been deleted, and no reason given for doing so. On the edited Posts, there is no note to say that the Post has been edited, by the Poster or by a Moderator.

Who is doing this? Is it a technical problem? Or can moderators/anyone now edit and delete Posts as they choose? (without leaving any info that this has been done). Or has this always been the case, and I only just noticed it now?

Surely there should be some technical note to say that this has been done? Threads will get very confusing if Posts just start disappearing without any note that they were ever there. And it's unfair to edit peoples' Posts without leaving any note on the Post to say that this has been done.

@Giverny ??

Regards
Antony

 

[zand]

This is a very valid point @diamondnostril It would be good to get some answers so we all know where we stand, it can indeed be very confusing when posts are 'cleansed'.

 

[Squire Fulwood]

If this is the case then it is reminiscent of the Ministry of Truth where Winston Smith worked in the book 1984.

 

[dannyw]

Oh I've had loads disappear without notification or explanation. Please read this quickly, it may be gone soon

 

[Indy51]

I'm guessing that the removed posts all belong to one poster who recently returned to the site and has some very (to put it kindly) eccentric if not downright dangerous theories about hypoglycemia and insists on pushing them on unsuspecting newbies.

 

[Enclave]

Moderators can edit or delete posts if they deem them to be in breach of copywrite, or going off thread or becoming nasty or irrelevant.
The moderators do have their guide lines to follow to keep the forums helpful and friendly.

 

[diamondnostril]

I'm guessing that the removed posts all belong to one poster who recently returned to the site and has some very (to put it kindly) eccentric if not downright dangerous theories about hypoglycemia and insists on pushing them on unsuspecting newbies.

The member you mention here had 1 Post deleted; this was the Post where s/he was complaining about another of their Posts being edited.

One deletion was of a Post from a new Member, with just a handful of Posts. One mysterious edit was of a Post from a member that seems to be very well-respected on this forum, with thousands of Posts.

If the Deletions and Edits have been made by the Moderators for reasons of "safety", so that "unacceptable" opinions or inaccurate/dangerous information are not displayed, then why isn't this clearly stated? This is a reasonable thing, so why not just say it?

What I object to is deleting/editing Posts without displaying any info that this has been done. This can make the remaining parts of edited Posts, and the responses to Posts which don't exist any more, look completely nonsensical and foolish. This is not fair.

 

[Squire Fulwood]

I agree with deleting some posts. I have seen a number of get rich quick newbies doing their product placement in the middle of the night. We've had everything from tree huggers to built in kitchens. I also like to see the back of trolls with multitudes of identities who just like to amuse themselves by causing trouble.

Having said that I think that editing a post written by someone else in order to change its meaning sounds like a game we could all enjoy.

 

[Robbity]

I'm aware too that some posts have edited or removed without explanation recently. I appreciate there may be times when this needs to be done, but I also believe that a little courtesy is also required, and the poster(s) concerned should be told the reason why this has happened, and from comments this isn't always the case. Unless they're told - whether publicly or privately - they are not necessarily going to know what is unacceptable.

Robbity

 

[Administrator]

Anything done in the forum has a log assigned to it - from the first post, we can see 4 posts have been deleted:

http://puu.sh/kHul7/b7728b4925.png
http://puu.sh/kHukV/c15a30cf27.png

And for the final post, http://puu.sh/kHuvP/3ef0717c36.png

@diamondnostril - your point "If the Deletions and Edits have been made by the Moderators for reasons of "safety", so that "unacceptable" opinions or inaccurate/dangerous information are not displayed, then why isn't this clearly stated? This is a reasonable thing, so why not just say it?" is valid - we're working on the forum so all deleted/edited posts can be footnoted on the page, and also the reason. That'll clear up the bulk of confusion.

@Giverny is currently on holiday so please tag @Administrator for attention.

We've un-deleted the posts from the http://www.diabetes.co.uk/forum/threads/getting-bloods-under-7-0mmol.85501/ so people can see the posts being referenced. I think everyone would be in agreement that the posts un-deleted are dangerous, however, perhaps we should discuss what people would like to happen to posts that are like this? In this case, they were certainly made for the point of safety.

As a community, we have the option to leave these posts, however they do require some sort of caveat. We wouldn't perhaps want others (e.g. newly diagnosed) making assumptions off potentially dangerous and/or incorrect information.

So, perhaps we could consider removing the text but replacing with 'Edited due to REASON'?

 

[tim2000s]

Lol. I'm glad I didn't read the response otherwise I would have had an interesting conversation....

So, perhaps we could consider removing the text but replacing with 'Edited due to REASON'?

I think this is a good idea - I know that some forums, where posts are edited in Situ - have a note about who edited them.

 

[Administrator]

@tim2000s mods/admin can see those so nothing is ever 'lost' as it were. We're working on tweaking the code so people can see why a post was edited/deleted and by who, rather than see the post itself (as otherwise that defeats the object!)

 

[diamondnostril]

Anything done in the forum has a log assigned to it - from the first post, we can see 4 posts have been deleted:

http://puu.sh/kHul7/b7728b4925.png
http://puu.sh/kHukV/c15a30cf27.png

And for the final post, http://puu.sh/kHuvP/3ef0717c36.png

@diamondnostril - your point "If the Deletions and Edits have been made by the Moderators for reasons of "safety", so that "unacceptable" opinions or inaccurate/dangerous information are not displayed, then why isn't this clearly stated? This is a reasonable thing, so why not just say it?" is valid - we're working on the forum so all deleted/edited posts can be footnoted on the page, and also the reason. That'll clear up the bulk of confusion.

@Giverny is currently on holiday so please tag @Administrator for attention.

We've un-deleted the posts from the http://www.diabetes.co.uk/forum/threads/getting-bloods-under-7-0mmol.85501/ so people can see the posts being referenced. I think everyone would be in agreement that the posts un-deleted are dangerous, however, perhaps we should discuss what people would like to happen to posts that are like this? In this case, they were certainly made for the point of safety.

As a community, we have the option to leave these posts, however they do require some sort of caveat. We wouldn't perhaps want others (e.g. newly diagnosed) making assumptions off potentially dangerous and/or incorrect information.

So, perhaps we could consider removing the text but replacing with 'Edited due to REASON'?

Hi,

Thanks very much for your response and your explanation.

I think it's a necessary step to put a clear notification, when a Post has been deleted or edited. This allows the subsequent Posts of a thread to be followed without an incorrect impression that somebody is talking nonsense (because their Post refers back to now non-existent Post).

Exactly how to deal with Posts that contain information that some people consider dangerous or unacceptable is a wider issue. Peoples' opinions on what is unacceptable/dangerous will differ, as will opinions on how to deal with Posts that are judged to be unacceptable/dangerous. I expect whatever is decided will please some and displease others. In this respect, I agree that the Administrators are doing their best and are invloved in what can be a thankless task.

So for what it's worth, @Administrator, thanks!

Regards
Antony

 

[Squire Fulwood]

edited in Situ - have a note about who edited them.

I like that idea. It would help to standardise the moderation procedure.

 

[dawnmc]

Ive had one of my posts deleted too, it wasn't scandalous at all, it was just requesting that things got back on track. But heyho!!!

 

[Administrator]

Thanks Antony -

We'd be very interested to discuss what could be done so not to stifle conversation, but somehow hide/edit posts that could be dangerous/misleading.

Currently, any posts edited or deleted will be obvious to a) the user (OP who made the post) and b) moderators/admin as they can see the activity log.

Our options are:

• A - Leave as is (no-one knows other than OP/admin/moderators)
  Probably not the best idea (this thread is a perfect example why!) but gets around dangerous information not being visible at all. Only concerns are, as you say, what some people consider dangerous or unacceptable is a wider issue.
• B - Moderators could leave a post if deleting a post, or update a post if making an edit - 'A post was deleted by MODERATOR X because REASON Y' on deleted posts and similarly, 'This post was edited by MODERATOR X because REASON Y' in the 'edit' part of any edited posts. This is a simple work around solution - if the post was ever queried, we would be show the deleted post or edited contents.
• C - Leave the post
  Probably not the best idea, simply from a misinformation POV.
• D - Create a workaround where the post is edited/hidden, but could be seen if user's wanted to.
  This is probably the most utilitarian scenario, however the concern about dangerous info still remains. User would have a window/box saying that this information was edited/deleted because of XYZ too as a warning before opening the text.

At the moment B is quickest with D where we'd like to end up. As ever, if there are any concerns, please tag @Giverny and @Administrator and we're happy to disclose the post text.

Only slight issue is that when posts have been edited, it sometimes make it tricky as the OP can overwrite the original text with their edited version, but one step at a time.

Thanks for being understanding - if knowledge is power, information is liberating and education is the premise of progress (according to Kofi Annan). We certainly don't want to censor anything, so posts like this are great to ensure we don't digress.

 

[zand]

@tim2000s mods/admin can see those so nothing is ever 'lost' as it were. We're working on tweaking the code so people can see why a post was edited/deleted and by who, rather than see the post itself (as otherwise that defeats the object!)

This is a good idea. I once had a post edited by a moderator with nothing to show that it had been modified at all. I myself added 'edited by moderator' because the post didn't make sense without the bit that had been taken out.

 

[azure]

I'd just like to point out that sometimes it is more diplomatic to delete without leaving a reason for everyone to see. That's a general comment there, not aimed at anybody. I've had PMs from people asking why their post was deleted and I'm happy to explain to them. That keeps it private.

Posts are rarely edited, and if they are, it's usually for reasons of safety or to remove possibly offensive comments. I'd have thought that would be obvious to the poster. If someone posts a rude comment about another member, getting all outraged because their post was edited to remove it, is not on.

Also, bear in mind that some of the edited and deleted posts have been reported by other members for dangerous advice or offensive or insensitive comments.

I'm happy to explain in a PM why I've edited or deleted any posts. It's not something moderators do lightly and often we discuss it amongst ourselves to ensure we're making the right decision.

 

[andcol]

I must admit I like option D. But when you obfuscate a post it would be good to see the reason why as well so that we do not go looking at a snake oil salesman. I How would you handle complete threads?

 

[diamondnostril]

Thanks Antony -

We'd be very interested to discuss what could be done so not to stifle conversation, but somehow hide/edit posts that could be dangerous/misleading.

Currently, any posts edited or deleted will be obvious to a) the user (OP who made the post) and b) moderators/admin as they can see the activity log.

Our options are:

• A - Leave as is (no-one knows other than OP/admin/moderators)
  Probably not the best idea (this thread is a perfect example why!) but gets around dangerous information not being visible at all. Only concerns are, as you say, what some people consider dangerous or unacceptable is a wider issue.
• B - Moderators could leave a post if deleting a post, or update a post if making an edit - 'A post was deleted by MODERATOR X because REASON Y' on deleted posts and similarly, 'This post was edited by MODERATOR X because REASON Y' in the 'edit' part of any edited posts. This is a simple work around solution - if the post was ever queried, we would be show the deleted post or edited contents.
• C - Leave the post
  Probably not the best idea, simply from a misinformation POV.
• D - Create a workaround where the post is edited/hidden, but could be seen if user's wanted to.
  This is probably the most utilitarian scenario, however the concern about dangerous info still remains. User would have a window/box saying that this information was edited/deleted because of XYZ too as a warning before opening the text.

At the moment B is quickest with D where we'd like to end up. As ever, if there are any concerns, please tag @Giverny and @Administrator and we're happy to disclose the post text.

Only slight issue is that when posts have been edited, it sometimes make it tricky as the OP can overwrite the original text with their edited version, but one step at a time.

Thanks for being understanding - if knowledge is power, information is liberating and education is the premise of progress (according to Kofi Annan). We certainly don't want to censor anything, so posts like this are great to ensure we don't digress.

I've realised that I've opened a can of worms, and done nothing to help clear up

So . . . from the options you listed, I think B is the best, over the long-term.

D is a bit like putting a sticker on a box "Do not look at the interesting contents of this Box". I reckon more people will look inside it than if the warning was not there. I suspect more people will read/take interest in a Post where they see this warning.

I'm all for free speech, and I don't really like the idea at all of deleting Posts or removing information from them. But, if we do generally agree that some forms of expression do need to be "dealt with" due to fears over safety of others, then I reckon we should have the courage of our convictions and go ahead and deal with it. As long as the information is there, that the Post has been deleted or edited for reason XYZ, I'd be very happy with that.

Regards
Antony