Tee, I see you deleted another thread...
 

I don't know why anyone would participate in a thread started by someone who almost always deletes the thread a day later when the discussion doesn't go in a direction HE likes. It's a weakness of this board.

Don't worry, I'll probably delete it myself. Now that I quoted you, though, your post lives as long as *I* want it to, barring the act of an actual moderator.

Wow. Too bad Tee didn't start this thread.

Glad you're commenting on a WOBW thread with a WOBW. Nice that you're always nearby when Tee is involved.

The mods can feel free to delete this thread whenever they like. I, however, am not going to.

Nahh. I just usually can't resist posting a WOBW to an obvious WOBW. It's a weakness of mine, not the boards.

Which is your "right", just as deleting threads one has started is the right of others. I've utilized it from time to time. Am I not supposed to discuss it because someone else has as well? I'll make note of that.

I sure hope you aren't referring to me, as I do not post on McGriffs. If you see SanDiegoSteve over there, it is someone else taking advantage of being able to name yourself whatever you want over there.

FWIW, I agree with Rich that the "delete thread" feature on this board is a weakness, more like a bug than a feature to me.

Individuals should certainly be free to delete their own posts, but they should NOT be free to delete anybody else's posts, just because they happened to start the thread with the first post.

I would be interested in reading a rationale that justifies this board feature/bug.

You, know, I can understand and accept your thoughts on this. (And without linking you in an accusatory manner to another poster who agrees with you and is "involved.")

You could be right, it might be an unintended consequence of the delete feature. None-the-less, I still believe one who starts a thread should have the ability to end it.

Here's where I'm coming from. Let's say Lieutenant Dan or littleboyblue posts an umpiring 101 question such as "what defines an umpire?" Let's say you or I or anybody else resists the temptation to make fun of him, and instead takes the time to type up and post a thoughtful, detailed response, with rule citations from section 9.00 and everything.

My answer does not belong to Lieutenant Dan; it belongs to me. And it belongs to every reader of the board, as long as I want my words to stay there. If Lieutenant Dan in a fit of pique or embarrassment or whatever decides to delete his post, he should be entitled to do that, but if deleting his post automatically wipes out MY post, made in good faith and intended not only as a reply to Lieutenant Dan but also as sharing the benefit of my experience with any other readers out there, that's gonna piss me off, legitimately, and that is a BUG, not a feature of the board software.

However, since, as you say, he is "entitled" to delete his thread starting post for whatever reason, he should be entitled to delete it completely. When one "quotes" his post, it is then contained in their post. The only way he can delete his post completely, is to delete the thread.

Again, I can accept that this is an unintended consequence of the the delete feature, but I don't have a problem with it.

Being quoted is one of the risks of hitting the SEND button in the first place. There is a huge difference between being QUOTED and being CENSORED. Being able to delete your own post doesn't fully mitigate the risk that you might still be quoted, but being able to delete an entire thread effectively censors everyone else who participated in the thread, and that ain't right.

Just what in the hell are you babbling about here? Responsibility for what, exactly? You mentioned McGriff's, which is a troll site that I do not visit. I have been on there exactly twice in my life. Once, to post a notice to whoever keeps posting there pretending to be me to stop doing it, and another time as Sarah Evans in response to PWL writing as Jim Evans over there. I did not post any of the garbage over there. The one time I read the sick crap on that site was more than enough for me to know better than to go there.

As far as what is written on this site, sure, I've made many boneheaded posts, some of which I deleted, some of which Mick or Bob has deleted, and some of which live on in archive infamy. So what is your point? I still don't get it. I don't "wish" to go back to do anything. Any post I left on this board is just fine with me, as-is.

he he he...
 

The more and more I read, the more I begin to think......













You the Man!

This thread is hilarious.;)

Why should a thread starter have this privilege when someone who replies doesn't?

I'm poster number 3 in a thread and I quote the second poster in the thread. Poster number 2 has no ability to make anything but his post go away -- not the quote or the reply. Why would you argue that the thread starter should have special privileges?

The answer: exactly for that reason. Why should a person who is moderator have special privileges? Also, for exactly that reason.

Quite often people do things beacuase they can, or because of who they are. Surely you're familiar with that.

Well, that's fine. But I will not post in a thread started by a notorious thread-deleter.

Actually I may just post a canned post warning others that Tee deletes all threads he starts so people don't waste their time.

Hmmm,

I find myself largely on the same side of this particular question as Rich Fronheiser and Dave Hensley.

I do not think an individual should have the ability to delete what someone else has posted (other than someone acting at the direction of the owner's of the site), even if he was the originator of the thread. I would guess that the fact that it is possible to do so is simply a function of the structure of the "database" used to store the contents of these forums, rather than an intended feature or any defect in the code which manages the site.

Ultimately, the value of this forum is determined by the sum of what is posted here.

There are some who post here, regularly and frequently, who contribute nothing of any value to the forum. To me, that's kind of annoying because it creates "noise" that is tedious to wade through and makes it more difficult to find the material that is of value.

There are some who post here who frequently post incorrect information and almost never post anything of value. In my opinion, those individuals actually detract from the value of the forum and are destructive of its purpose.

There are others who consistently provide good information and insight in their posts and share their extensive experience for the benefit of others.

When someone deletes a thread that others have posted to, it is often the case that useful information gets deleted along with some drivel. It also creates "revisionist history" which limits the acountability of those who post garbage as well as the credit to those who post useful information or thoughts.

Personally, I don't delete my own posts or the posts of others who post on a thread I initiate. I find those that do overly self-centered. I am somewhat reluctant to post to a thread when the initiator has demonstrated a tendency to delete his threads. If I choose to, it is with the understanding that it may disappear. Such is life.

JM

That'll show him. Boy, I bet he'll be sorry.

(Notorious thread-deleter...sounds like a line from the old Seifeld series.)

That would be a lie. Tee doesn't delete all threads. You could write that there is a risk that he might delete a thread if you were at all interested in being accurate.

You know, I just can't get excited about this. I understand Mr. Hensley's point. I understand Tee's. I don't understand Rich's over the top emotional issue that would drive him to post a "warning" in Tee's threads, however.

I don't care. I really don't. None of what has been posted here and subsequently deleted was Rosetta Stone material as far as I can recall. If anyone feels that what they wrote is some great truth that needs to be preserved, they can always start their own thread.

What's the big deal?

The fact that a thread starter essentially owns everything I write on this board.

While statements containing "always" or "never" are rarely accurate, in this particular case, Rich's statement at least can't be disproven by scanning the active threads on the board. There are no active threads started by Tee. Since we know that Tee has started one or more threads, the fact there are none available for reading does in fact support Rich's statement that Tee deletes all his threads. At least the statement can't be disproven in the most logical, readily confirmable manner available to us.

I didn't know that there were conditions placed on Rich's statement...I didn't see any. Anyway, I found a thread by Tee starte in January of this year, but I guess that doesn't count since it doesn't meet the added on conditions.

Oh, well...

Again, if anything you ever write is that important, start a thread. This isn't that hard. Maybe you're having a hard time with it because you can't control it? Contact Carl, maybe he'll make you a moderator.

Then demonstrating that a thread started by Tee still exists on the board certainly disproves the absolute statement Rich made. But how did you find it? I scrolled through every screen of topics available to me, and there were no topics started by Tee. Do you have to search for all posts by author?

When I discovered, as you did, that the pages of threads available only took us back two weeks and, knowing that Tee really doesn't start that many threads, I simply did a search and found one on January 8th, I believe it was.

Guys,

Why are you getting so upset about an Internet Forum Thread? So what if you posted to it and it got deleted? You gave your opinion or answer and that's that! If the starter decides to delete it, what difference is it?

Does it affect your lives?
Apparently, it seems that many of you have no lives at all!

Will it affect the way you umpire in the future?
Hmmm, from your posts, it seems if the post that you responded to gets deleted, it deletes the information in your brains too!

Will it make any difference to your loved ones?
No, you dumb a$$es, it won't.

So stop complaining like a bunch of middle school sissies and get on with your lives!

This is my opinion, and I couldn't give a crap if someone deletes it!

I can speak only for myself, but I can assure you I haven't gotten the least bit upset by this thread, or anything posted in this forum, ever.

Well, this has been asked and answered, but I'll repeat it and I'll type slower this time.

If I take the time to compose and post a thorough, researched, spelling-checked and well constructed post to any particular thread, the chances are that post will contain information that is not only relevant to the starter of the thread, but to OTHER readers, present and future. I don't know about you, but most of my posts are written with care and attention to the fact that my words will be up there for anybody and everybody to read. I'm OK with that; I think those considerations make for higher quality posts, and a higher level of discussion throughout the board.

No, it won't affect the way I umpire, but it very well may affect the way Lieutenant Dan or littleboyblue or ozzyosbourne umpires in the future. Notwithstanding the cliche about leading a horse to water, if my posts are available to other readers now and in the future, there is a greater than zero chance that those words will affect the way those other readers umpire. If I have been censored by the arbitrary and capricious deletion of the thread containing my post(s) by the thread starter, then there is indeed zero chance that my words will have any affect on anybody. Then the decision becomes "what's the point of answering a post in a thread started by a notorious thread-deleter?"

Sheesh, where does all this childish namecalling come from? Grow the phuck up, man.

Oh come on, Tim,

This thread doesn't even compare with Lt. Dan's recent "I'm Done" post for pure entertainment value.

Entertainment-wise, gruberted's "running gloves" post has also always been a personal favorite of mine.

Why, your own "Whatever Happened to Class?" thread was far more entertaining than this.

Of course, the 1st and 3rd of these examples have been deleted, so it would be hard for a person to do a fair evaluation.

Now none of those posts was really about you, so maybe you didn't find them so entertaining - but I did.

JM

*munch munch munch*

I had a retort for this thread, but UPS just showed up at my door with my new wristbands, and I'm anxious to try them on.

Hey Tee, I heard you deleted another thread...