General Chat

Jax I saw that post also, and was about to report but got there later than you evidently lol.

I wonder what the reason given for deleting Fairy's post was? No names were mentioned, just a query as to whether, if ones child had commited murders, one would still visit or disown him/her...a suitably vague and acceptable topic to think about I would have thought.

How is it "offensive" to suggest someone may have a 'disease' based on what you can see ?

I used to watch the old pope John Paul ii, long before it was publicised that he had Parkinsons...and , because of my personal knowledge of the symptoms, 'assumed' he had it... not an 'offensive' assumption in any way.

Had I posted a thread saying I noticed he had "the shakes, the rather blank expression that comes with PD, the hesitation of speech " would that have been reported I wonder?

It concerns me that someone who may be suffering from anorexia, may be reluctant to speak of it because it is something that is somehow impolite or may be offensive to mention it.

When I reported one for too much personal info re being in prison what he looked like age name ect it was request review for an hour or so then back on.

Shall not bother anymore

jax

The removal of my tips threads were nothing to do with any site problems, they just disappeared. The powers that be said that is the sort of thread that we like, please feel free to post it again. I don't keep copies normally; I have re-done some but not all. Makes one wonder what is the point (rhetorically).

Maybe these removal of posts etc are due to the probs we are having, GR have apologised about the Page 1 problem....although l don't think they have mentioned the removals, its a thought though!!

jude

I've received a weird and wonderful explanation for the removal of my Kate Middleton post. Two-pronged. Apparently one may not publish facetious "assumptions" about the health of public persons in the UK lest one suffer the wrath of the law; I very much doubt that this was the nature of the complaint actually made. And it was "offensive". I love that second one. All the assorted bigotry one sees on this board, all the quite insulting things said about politicians and others on this baord, and it's "offensive" to say something mildly disparaging about a public person not present here.

Let us all be careful not to mention the little princesses' hats now.

But if anybody wants to send me an email address, I do have a quite entertaining photo essay on that last ...

I have been in contact with a fairly new poster who has had three posts removed since the weekend

One was on living rellies.....No personal info at all not even a name

One on suggestions .....Again nothing wrong with the post

and another which I was told was started 30th April and now gone

The poster has been told that they can repost on the same boards if they want to????


If there was nothing wrong why remove it?

jax

Nothing much changes does it Rose? Such a shame there are some very petty persons on here and the 'management' are still getting it wrong ;-)

So ... I'm waiting for a reply as to what rule my post on this board broke.

HAHAHAHAHA!

Actually, I'm waiting for a reply to tell me which POST of mine was deleted.

The standard email now seems to identify neither the post that was deleted nor the reason why it's deleted.

Hey, that's progress from the previous régime, eh?

They didn't give reasons, but at least they identified the post.

Now, we get this:
______________________________________________________________

It has been brought to our attention that the nature of this posting breaches
the Message Board guidelines and terms and conditions of our website
and the item has now been removed from Genes Reunited.

Continuing to create content of this nature may result in your eventual
removal from the site.
______________________________________________________________

with NO information about WHICH POST broke a rule, let alone WHICH RULE it broke.

So smart it hurts, this is.

I returned after an extended vacation some time ago and went hunting for a thread of mine on the TTF board.

Genuine thread about some grx3 grparents of mine. In which I'd got some excellent help. Somebody found my Wiltshire-born grx3 grf, who I knew had died in the workhouse in Wiltshire, remarrying in Scotland!

So anyhow, I went looking for it ... and it was gone.

A paranoid person would think that the glitch gods and goddesses were out to get them.

A rational person knows it isn't the deities of glitch who are.

I had thought of that too, Dizzi but as Janey said - you have two goes at it.

Sue

It's an Alice in wonderland world sometimes.

I have had threads whooshed - some tips ones - and no one could understand how they went confused emoticon.

no it isn't possible ( nor was it before ) to rr by mistake, previously I pressed that rr too many times myself instead of edit lol, it is not as easy to make that mistake now because of the positioning, but I did test to make sure when it changed.

OK JUST AN IDEA

Indeed, SueMaid.

But -- just one more example of the arbitrariness and inconsistency in the decisions.


In my case I have no doubt that it's the same person who was busy reporting my posts in a thread on Genealogy Chat ... or a close acquaintance ...

And I'm right. The above post is still here.

So -- and I'd wondered about that as well -- no.

Accidentally clicking "report as abuse" doesn't result in a report being submitted and the post content being temporarily deleted and replaced by the message about "requested for review" (and that garbled English hurts my teeth every time I see it).

I think I know who reported my first post on the Aussie thread - it came too soon after an unpleasant message elsewhere. If I'm right then it was pure spite but full marks to GR for reinstating it - with an apology I might add.

Sue

I'm going to try an experiment.

I'm going to post this and then click "report as abuse" but NOT submit the report, just backpage to the thread and reload.

I'm thinking the process is not completed until you choose the reason and submit the report ...

I THINK THE ABUSE LINK IS IN THE WRONG PLACE
COULD EASY BE ACTIVATD BY MISTAKE


BUT I DINNA DO IT ..'ONNEST

These things are really unbelievable and quite unacceptable.

I do want assurances that the site management are dealing appropriately with the makers of illegitimate requests for review.

I request review of posts that contain inappropriate personal details about third parties (on the normal board, Find Ancestors, I always ask first that the poster, be it the thread starter or a "helper", remove the material).

Whoever has decided it is their job to be the board censor -- discussions can now be completely disrupted by simply clicking that link, because if the post in question is the opening post, the thread then makes no sense -- I'd like you to introduce yourself/selves.

The censorship in question is plainly not of speech or even of ideas, it is of *persons*. In my case, anyhow. ;)

(I do think the thread I originally enquired about was deleted by the thread starter themself, for reasons I don't know since I didn't see the thread after I posted it. And I guess an explanation won't be forthcoming. I view that as private censorship, as well, anyhow.)