Photographs/ Photographers that make it

[tomdinning]

So that's the way we play the game is it?
Maybe the next time you are in a gallery and see a picture you don't like you can take it off the wall and bin it.
Come to think of it I better do that to mine before you get to them.
I'll leave you to it, whatever it is you do.

[Drew Smith]

What a very strange man.

[MattUK]

Yeah, very odd.

Why are moderators deleting messages here? It's rather big brother. I also had a post of mine deleted last night in a completely different thread.

If the mods don't like where a thread is going, surely they should close it? Deleting people's posts just isn't cricket.

[Drew Smith]

It's what they do Matt. I can understand that they don't have the time or inclination to selectively look at what has happened and instead just aputate. They won't want to leave 'personal attacks' on the Forum as it's bad for commerce.

If they closed the whole thread then I think people that posted sensibly prior to the good Mr Dinning, would have grounds to be annoyed.

Tom has removed all his pics (presume they were his) from his Gallery, I think because he feared he'd receive less than favourable comments on them from the likes of us. At least that was the the jist of his last post. He needn't have feared; people like Tom are their own punishment.

[Cathus]

that's a shame, I could have sworn I'd paid for the full half hour arguement

[MattUK]

I see Drew - it's a shame that one of my 'innocent' posts from another thread got caught up.

And Cathus, put up yer dukes then

[Lurkalot]

Not guilty of this one. I can say though the posts were reported, and then acted upon. So, what ever the mods do they'll upset someone.

[MattUK]

Ah well. It's just that in my experience, a simple message such as:

"Closing, as this thread is going off-topic. Feel free to discuss the original subject matter in another thread, but please keep the heated posts out of it"

Would have sufficed? Anyway, I'll move on

[chris-p]

We've had abusive site members before (some repeatedly) and, in fairness, there are no particular guidelines for moderation.

Originally Posted by MattUK

it's a shame that one of my 'innocent' posts from another thread got caught up

Matt - what post of yours was deleted? If you can point me to the thread I can re-instate the post if it was soft deleted (which they usually are).

Originally Posted by Drew Smith

I can understand that they don't have the time or inclination to selectively look at what has happened and instead just aputate. They won't want to leave 'personal attacks' on the Forum as it's bad for commerce.

Thats not entirely fair, Drew - as mods, we've got no interest in the commerce of the site at all. The way a moderator responds to an issue on the site is down to him. We have discussed rules of thumb for dealing with things like spam but the sort of issue we had here doesn't occur particularly often and there is little precedent. There is never a right or wrong way to deal with this sort of thing, there is only how you would deal with it. Donoreo dealt with it in the way he thought best.

Originally Posted by Drew Smith

If they closed the whole thread then I think people that posted sensibly prior to the good Mr Dinning, would have grounds to be annoyed.

This's true. As I said above, there is no official guidance from PR staff with regards to moderation of the forum, although it was asked for a while ago (nothing was forthcoming).

[Drew Smith]

Originally Posted by chris-p

Thats not entirely fair, Drew - as mods, we've got no interest in the commerce of the site at all. The way a moderator responds to an issue on the site is down to him.

I wasn't having a pop at the Mods as such Chris, by 'they' I was referring to the upper echelon at DC. I apprecaite that you guys are given a task to perform without necessarily having the 'guideline' support.

Kudos.