Scorched Earth Post Removal

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 9:37 pm

While editing posts is certainly a prerogative, I find it to be rather disruptive for a poster to engage in a scorched earth policy where they remove a large number of posts that were a significant portion of a discussion.

I would like to request that the mods review the recent unpleasantness and review whether (if able) they should restore those posts to avoid disruption to a thread.

Mr. Fed · Post by **Mr. Fed** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:01 pm

Personally, I think it should be left up to (a) the good sense of the poster, and (b) the social sanction that will result if enough people disagree with a particular instance of it.

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:04 pm

Mr. Fed wrote:Personally, I think it should be left up to (a) the good sense of the poster, and (b) the social sanction that will result if enough people disagree with a particular instance of it.

A-yup. This is my take as well. If someone wants to go scorched earth, they're going to have to deal with the cOOmunity repercussions, but I don't think they should have their words forcibly plastered in public for all eternity if that is not their desire. Ultimately the poster has final say for their own words (assuming those words meet forum decorum).

Dogstar · Post by **Dogstar** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:22 pm

To me, it's a little about common sense, time, and perspective. I've been caught up in the heat of the moment arguing about politics when I've said (or written) certain things that, in retrospect, I'd certainly like to retract. We're a community, not an academic journal. Allowing someone to potentially recognize they've entered into a similar situation and take a step back is part of what makes things work here.

pr0ner · Post by **pr0ner** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:44 pm

I do find this particular scorched earth tactic rather hypocritical, given a) the typical rhetoric used in these forums by that poster, and b) his fear of being truly harmed.

That said, I guess he can do whatever he wants (even if I think it's the cheap way out). Perhaps in the future, though, he should tone down the over the top rhetoric, lest he be constantly reminded of going scorched earth when he went way off the deep end.

pr0ner · Post by **pr0ner** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 12:03 am

To add another question for discussion:

Would it be considered acceptible to go scorched earth on a vast number posts in a bunch of different threads in a particular sub-forum?

RLMullen · Post by **RLMullen** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 8:55 am

This will be a self-correcting problem. From now on anyone replying to an inflammatory post will most likely quote the entire post. The originator can certainly delete their own posts, but they cannot do anything about their text that has been quoted. The originator will then be at the mercy of the person who quoted them, because that person now has the ability and power to alter the quoted text. The only way to combat that sort of underhanded action will be to leave the original post as a point of reference. Thus, we have a self-correcting problem.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 9:03 am

RLMullen wrote:This will be a self-correcting problem. From now on anyone replying to an inflammatory post will most likely quote the entire post. The originator can certainly delete their own posts, but they cannot do anything about their text that has been quoted. The originator will then be at the mercy of the person who quoted them, because that person now has the ability and power to alter the quoted text. The only way to combat that sort of underhanded action will be to leave the original post as a point of reference. Thus, we have a self-correcting problem.

Don't people usually quote the most important stuff anyway?

I don't know what the original topic was but the self correcting problem for me is that I begin not pay attention to people who would try to break the forums in their own weird way. If you act like you are taking your ball to go home and your ball is integral part of the group's game then I choose to play in less games with you in the future. As a reminder to myself not to get involved with you *plonk* is handy feature.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 9:47 am

I want to say we've had this issue before - possibly even the same person.

If you act like you are taking your ball to go home and your ball is integral part of the group's game then I choose to play in less games with you in the future.

I'm pretty sure this is the unofficial policy, no? If I corrected something (or completely deleted it) and someone else had the text in question quoted in a reply post, I'd probably send them a PM to ask them to get rid of it. But to delete all of your posts in a discussion? See above.

Peacedog · Post by **Peacedog** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 9:48 am

Isgrimnur wrote:While editing posts is certainly a prerogative, I find it to be rather disruptive for a poster to engage in a scorched earth policy where they remove a large number of posts that were a significant portion of a discussion.

I would like to request that the mods review the recent unpleasantness and review whether (if able) they should restore those posts to avoid disruption to a thread.

I don't believe the mods are able to do so. I don't think they should even if they could.

I do find the behavior distasteful. I think it's right for us (the community) to point out it's distasteful.

By the by, this is the power of Quoting. Green Goo (and others, but he was heavily active early in the thread) chose to quote some but not all of the material he was responding to; normal behavior we all engage in. Quoting perserves text, though. I'm not saying he or anyone else should always quote; I'm just pointing out quoting is powerful. And if you ever suspect someone might pull a fast one/nuke a post/etc, but that post is relevant to what you are saying, quote that fucker.

Jag · Post by **Jag** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 9:59 am

Peacedog wrote: Quoting perserves text, though. I'm not saying he or anyone else should always quote; I'm just pointing out quoting is powerful. And if you ever suspect someone might pull a fast one/nuke a post/etc, but that post is relevant to what you are saying, quote that fucker.

QFT.

Freezer-TPF- · Post by **Freezer-TPF-** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:35 am

The Meal wrote:
Mr. Fed wrote:Personally, I think it should be left up to (a) the good sense of the poster, and (b) the social sanction that will result if enough people disagree with a particular instance of it.
A-yup. This is my take as well. If someone wants to go scorched earth, they're going to have to deal with the cOOmunity repercussions, but I don't think they should have their words forcibly plastered in public for all eternity if that is not their desire. Ultimately the poster has final say for their own words (assuming those words meet forum decorum).

Thirded. If authors want to delete their posts, that's their prerogative. I'd have a problem with a moderator restoring someone's deleted text. I'd also have a problem with someone deleting an entire thread they started (by deleting the first post and therefore nuking subsequent posts written by others), but that's not possible on this board (outside of extreme admin action, I suppose).

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:57 am

Freezer-TPF- wrote:I'd also have a problem with someone deleting an entire thread they started (by deleting the first post and therefore nuking subsequent posts written by others), but that's not possible on this board (outside of extreme admin action, I suppose).

That used to be possible (on GG, I think. It's all getting hazy) and it was truly obnoxious.

Peacedog · Post by **Peacedog** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:03 am

It was possible on GG; vbulletin or whatever the hell we were using (I can't remember, suddenly) allowed users to delete their own OPs, and it took the whole thread with it. Boy did that cause some tears.

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:25 am

Peacedog wrote:It was possible on GG; vbulletin or whatever the hell we were using (I can't remember, suddenly) allowed users to delete their own OPs, and it took the whole thread with it. Boy did that cause some tears.

I share a birth date with the poster who originally started the HOLY SHIT 9/11 IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW thread that he ended up nuking when the days-afterward conversation turned in a direction he didn't care for. That was the worst of it.

Asharak · Post by **Asharak** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:25 am

Peacedog wrote:vbulletin or whatever the hell we were using (I can't remember, suddenly)

UBB, yes?

- Ash

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:57 am

Thanks for the discussion, folks. You've made some compelling points. And I also recall this individual also performing a similar action previously, although my memory of it might have been on a board with different trends.

Peacedog · Post by **Peacedog** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 12:14 pm

UBB, correct. Thanks. God that's been bugging me since I originally posted in the history thread.

Someone will correct me if I am mistaken, but with phpBB as is, a user can't delete any of his/her posts if the post has been replied to, hence the "razing" we saw. I can't recall if that is configurable but I see that as a moot point (and I'm too lazy to research it); IMO the functionality is desirable. Ultimately, we don't want a situation where a post cannot be redacted due to posting mechanics (which would almost certainly prohibit things like editing). But we also want to frown upon the scored earth tactic more often than not. Policing the behavior belongs at the community level (like most things).

dbt1949 · Post by **dbt1949** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:01 pm

The Meal wrote:
Peacedog wrote:It was possible on GG; vbulletin or whatever the hell we were using (I can't remember, suddenly) allowed users to delete their own OPs, and it took the whole thread with it. Boy did that cause some tears.
I share a birth date with the poster who originally started the HOLY SHIT 9/11 IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW thread that he ended up nuking when the days-afterward conversation turned in a direction he didn't care for. That was the worst of it.

I remember that one. That thread was well over 20,pages long I believe. Hit a nerve with a lot of us.

Peacedog · Post by **Peacedog** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:41 pm

The Meal wrote: I share a birth date with the poster who originally started the HOLY SHIT 9/11 IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW thread that he ended up nuking when the days-afterward conversation turned in a direction he didn't care for. That was the worst of it.

Missed this before. I had no idea you shared a birth day with that guy.

Fireball · Post by **Fireball** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 3:35 pm

Allow me, if you will, to explain things from my point of view.

Despite having been asked not to do so before, a poster in the thread in question used my full name in a response. Like everyone here, I use a pseudonym for a reason, mostly to create a bit of space between my real life and my participation on this board.

I have posted here for years. For more years than I've had my current job. Some of those years were bad years for me, personally and emotionally, and that is reflected in the contents of posts from those years. The use of my full name could create a Google trail linking back to those posts, creating a potentially damaging and unfair situation -- not necessarily for me, but for people with whom I am associated. I am not the person I was in 2005, nor do I necessary hold all the same opinions as I did in 2005.

Given my change in circumstances, I try to avoid particularly contentious debates, particularly in the R&P forum. I use the edit function, and often come back after short periods of time to re-read and revise my posts. All to create more of the aforementioned space.

I was happy to continue to discuss the topic in that thread until my full name was used -- without reason, and seemingly as a taunt. I immediately PMed the member who used it and Board's leadership, asking for an editing of that post. The poster who posted my name has *no* other contact information available, either on here or on Popehat or on his personal website.

After several hours with no response from anyone and no action having been taken, it seemed that my only course of action was to end my participation on the Board, and to erase all my posts. I didn't want to do that, but I literally had no idea what else to do. During this process, I got a message saying that the issue had finally been corrected.

I am still not certain what to do about my participation on this Board. [Trimmed to be more polite. Hugs and kisses, Pr0ner.]

pr0ner · Post by **pr0ner** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:18 pm

Another target for my dislike?

I disagree with your opinions. The fact that you constantly call things and people evil (or, most recently, Rabbi Whatthefuck) is annoying, petty, immature, and worthy of being mocked. However, I've never disliked you. Your comment might change my mind, though.

naednek · Post by **naednek** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:51 pm

Peacedog wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:While editing posts is certainly a prerogative, I find it to be rather disruptive for a poster to engage in a scorched earth policy where they remove a large number of posts that were a significant portion of a discussion.

I would like to request that the mods review the recent unpleasantness and review whether (if able) they should restore those posts to avoid disruption to a thread.
I don't believe the mods are able to do so. I don't think they should even if they could.

I do find the behavior distasteful. I think it's right for us (the community) to point out it's distasteful.

By the by, this is the power of Quoting. Green Goo (and others, but he was heavily active early in the thread) chose to quote some but not all of the material he was responding to; normal behavior we all engage in. Quoting perserves text, though. I'm not saying he or anyone else should always quote; I'm just pointing out quoting is powerful. And if you ever suspect someone might pull a fast one/nuke a post/etc, but that post is relevant to what you are saying, quote that fucker.

Yeah if Runningman9 was around, the whole forum would have been archived just on quotes alone

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:58 pm

This was meant to be a PM. Sorry.

Fireball · Post by **Fireball** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 5:10 pm

I'm not trying to be anonymous. That would be impossible. I'm just trying to put some breathing room between A and B. If you Google my handle, yes, this pops up. It's a handle I use commonly. But if you Google my name, then this doesn't. That's what I want to maintain. I think it's a reasonable request to ask people to refer to me by my handle. And I only started clearing posts away when it seemed like my attempts to address the situation were failing. It wasn't rational, but I didn't know what else to do, and hen I saw that GoogleBot was one of the logged in users, I took action. If I could go back and undo it, I would.

Kelric · Post by **Kelric** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 6:07 pm

naednek wrote:Yeah if Runningman9 was around, the whole forum would have been archived just on quotes alone

I miss The Treatment.

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Tue Jun 08, 2010 6:11 pm

Kelric wrote:
naednek wrote:Yeah if Runningman9 was around, the whole forum would have been archived just on quotes alone
I miss The Treatment.

I literally only noticed today that I hadn't seen him around in a while. I'm just not that perceptive, I guess. And another one bites the dust.

naednek · Post by **naednek** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:11 am

Sith Lord wrote:
Kelric wrote:
naednek wrote:Yeah if Runningman9 was around, the whole forum would have been archived just on quotes alone
I miss The Treatment.
I literally only noticed today that I hadn't seen him around in a while. I'm just not that perceptive, I guess. And another one bites the dust.

I noticed it about a month ago, I think Trent Green is missing as well. I think it was towards the end of 24 that I thought we would have heard from both of them.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:15 am

They're too busy icing each other to post.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:24 am

naednek wrote:I noticed it about a month ago, I think Trent Green is missing as well. I think it was towards the end of 24 that I thought we would have heard from both of them.

My intention was to just take a breather at the end of January to calm down. I noticed that I was getting far too angry about things, and it just didn't seem worth it anymore. After a month or so of just reading, I was still getting irritated. I wrote a few responses to some things, but ultimately deleted them without posting them. After a while, I just stopped checking. Smoove_B mentioned this thread today, as he tried to compel me to start/participate in a Quinn thread based on some article he just read. It's been almost 6 months, and I'm more serene now. I didn't intend to drift away, it just sort of happened.

24 Ruled.

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:26 am

Well, come back. I miss the occasional Treatment™ and the Quinn musings, as well.

Trent Steel · Post by **Trent Steel** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:28 am

Fuck Trent Green. That guy was an asshole anyway.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:28 am

Trent Steel wrote:Fuck Trent Green. That guy was an asshole anyway.

I should note that calling you "Trent Green" made me laugh hard enough that I almost had to post.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:31 am

naednek wrote:
I noticed it about a month ago, I think Trent Green is missing as well.

I just wanted to quote this so it couldn't be scorched out.

Exodor · Post by **Exodor** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:44 am

Trent Steel wrote:Fuck Trent Green. That guy was an asshole anyway.

EvilHomer3k · Post by **EvilHomer3k** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:52 am

Trent Steel wrote:Fuck Trent Green. That guy was an asshole anyway.

His teammates in KC seemed to like him well enough. Not sure what your deal with him is. Now that Trent Steel guy. He's an ass.

naednek · Post by **naednek** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:20 pm

Trent Steel wrote:Fuck Trent Green. That guy was an asshole anyway.

LOL, sorry man.

Exodor · Post by **Exodor** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:48 pm

Every time I see the first two words of this thread title I get all excited and think there's a new version on the way.

It has also been hinted on December 2005, by the original developer, that more news on the official version may surface soon.[8] He mentioned this again in February 2006 in his blog. [9] This is suspected of being related to a suggested "Scorched Earth project" that the developer has mentioned in his blog in March of 2006

:

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:00 pm

An official sequel would be awesome. In the meantime, I've been enjoying Armored Strike Online for Android.

tjg_marantz · Post by **tjg_marantz** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:03 pm

What thread was this? Cliff's note? PM sufficient.