Comment - Suggestion

[Bob]

Wrong forum, I know....ought to be in the Comments and Suggestions forum.

 

Scooby/Moderator(s), I have a couple of questions:

 

(1) Is there a reason that the Comments and Suggestion forum is not open for new posts?

 

(2) Khun FH made a post within the last day regarding the Ocean 1 project including contacts and responses he received from the managers or partners of that apparently defunct project. I then posted a response which included my observation of what I saw when last walking by the almost empty site. Both of those posts were deleted for some unknown reason. Can you advise as to why the posts were deleted? And, for future possible deletions (presuming there won't be many), do you think it might be better to simply reference the reason why a post/thread is deleted? Doing that would help posters to understand what topics are off limits and, additionally, would help you avoid having to read/respond to posts like this!

[Guest fountainhall]

I’d like to add my agreement to Bob’s suggestions. That said, I am sure most of us fully accept that the job of moderator is far from easy, as one former moderator of this site mentioned several times! It is particularly difficult when a Board has quite a number of moderators (as this one has) and the moderating team is separated over a number of continents. The more moderators, the more individual opinions you are almost bound to have as to what is acceptable and what is not! Consensus on what should be deleted will therefore take well over 24 hours, which is clearly too long a time if a post, for example, breaks a Thai law or might constitute a deliberate libel.

 

Given that, though, the situation is clearly more complicated as there have been times, as in this case, when one moderator makes a decision on behalf of the others and one or two posts instantly disappear with, as Bob points out, no reason given. And occasionally, the posts will reappear, again as in this case, presumably after there has been a full discussion amongst the mods and, I assume, relevant objections from the poster considered. Sudden disappearance and then reappearance without explanation, though, makes life difficult for those following threads and raises doubts as to why the posts just disappeared in the first place.

 

I believe it will be of considerable benefit to posters and to moderators if there are some simple rules for deletion of posts. These should include the insertion of a note from a mod in place of the deleted post. In a clear-cut case of contravention, this should state, “A post has been deleted as it specifically contravenes the posting guidelines regarding . . . .(explanation as to which regulation/s has/have been contravened)".

 

Where there is doubt and a mod wishes all the mods to discuss it on their own forum before a final decision is made, the statement could be. “A post has been temporarily withdrawn as it is believed it may contravene the posting guidelines. The mods are discussing this and will either reinstate the post or will post a further notice stating why it can not be reinstated and which regulations have been contravened.”

 

As Bob suggests, this would make everything clear to posters.

[Guest snapshot]

I love FH's long and feisty investigative reports. There's an unabashed neurotic touch, which reminds me of ChristianPFC, and a little of myself sometimes.

 

That's why I was disappointed to see that post disappear for a while. Glad it's back.

[Guest fountainhall]

You are kind! Or maybe we are two of a kind Not sure what ChristianPFC will think, though.

[ChristianPFC]

I think that posters should be informed that their post was deleted, given a reason why it was deleted and given a copy of their deleted post.

[Bob]

For the record, I received a polite note by PM from one of the Moderators where he explained the concern with the posts mentioned. Although I've done it privately, I do wish to publicly thank the Moderator for the cordial tone and explanation.

I'd also note that the posts in question have re-appeared on the board.

[Guest fountainhall]

I also received a polite PM with the reason for the post being withdrawn. I happen not to agree with it, but then I am not a moderator. I respect the decision as there appears to be an issue involving the post of which i was not fully aware.

[Rogie]

I am not going to comment on the Ocean One thread as, apart from Fountainhall's excellent summary, I am ignorant of the machinations behind the scenes. . . it must be fun to speculate (pun intended), but not much point in us doing so on a forum such as this.

 

I was sorry to see the thread 'More fighting in Thailand in the next two months?' locked by the mod. The reason for it being locked is obvious and I don't disagree with that. However, . . .

 

. . . the subject of ex-pats and foreign visitors safety is vastly important, never mind some arbitrary time span such as two months, for as long into the future as the possibility exists it ought to be discussed and debated. But because one of the sparks for trouble happens to be undiscuss-able proper debate is stifled which is frustrating - in an ideal world anyone with an interest in another country should be able to share their views, whether they be left wing, right wing, carefully crafted viewpoints or rants, but as soon as one topic becomes out of bounds it's like fighting with one hand behind you back. Maybe there are forums based outside Thailand that allow a full-blooded discussion, that would be like a breath of fresh air as far as I am concerned. Harrumph! Enough of that. . .

 

Despite all that, I would still like to think we can properly discuss a topic along the lines of 'How do you see Thailand's Future?' where the valuable input from resident ex-pats can help those of us who are thinking of visiting for a first time (don't forget many more people than are registered members also read what we write here) or anyone contemplating moving to Thailand permanently.

 

It would need posters to respect the rules of the Board but ought to be possible. Any posts ignoring or flaunting the rules to be deleted, rather than an offending post staying in situ thereby causing the entire thread to be locked and ruining the discussion for everybody else.

[Guest fountainhall]


I was sorry to see the thread 'More fighting in Thailand in the next two months?' locked by the mod. The reason for it being locked is obvious and I don't disagree with that. However, . . .

 

For whatever reason, I still don't understand why it was locked! The prediction by the OP "there would be more fighting in the next 1-2 months" clearly has not come true. Indeed, here in Thailand, I never heard anything about even a mere hint of violence. The fact that Thaksin wants to return is hardly a secret, nor is it news; it's been predicted for more than a year, as has the possible return of the monies that were confiscated by the state.

 

The undertone of the thread was a basic political discussion that is common on other Boards. This Board itself has had a lot of political red-shirt/yellow-shirt debate in the past without the need for threads to be locked – or even warnings being provided. What is different with the locked thread? I wish I knew.

 

Yes, the title of the thread itself could be seen to be provocative. I do think the OP could have chosen a slightly less inflammatory title. In that case, though, the thread would surely be deleted rather than just locked?

 

Of more concern, I feel, is the reason provided by the Mod jomtien for locking the thread – “There are things that just don't get talked about on the boards.” There are indeed, but where in the posts was there anything that could not be “talked about”? The first four posts dealing with the fighting/yellow-shirt issue had been up for everyone to see for well over six weeks. So the political issue was clearly not the problem. Then Mr. Snapshot found it and added his two pennyworth (oops, two lines) on 20 August. 4 more short posts on the very same day, and then – boom! Some reason to lock the thread has arisen!

 

Given that 6-week delay, it seems the reason must be to do with the personalities mentioned in those last posts. But re-reading all those posts, I see nothing whatever that would merit the thread itself being locked! If a post was deemed to be a personal attack on an existing member (hardly possible in my reading), that could surely, as Rogie suggests, have been withdrawn if felt necessary (with an appropriate note on the page). And I see nothing there that had not been mentioned or referred to in other threads that remain open. So once again, I am confused. What am I missing here?

 

This Board has now had 3 threads locked in the space of 3 days. I can't recall more than 1 other since the beginning of the year. Is there something going on?

[Rogie]

Re: post #9, I have replied to FH by PM.

 

The post which caused the thread to be locked was deleted, but I did not realise that when I posted my comments in #8 above.

 

So, when I wrote in #8, "Any posts ignoring or flaunting the rules to be deleted, rather than an offending post staying in situ thereby causing the entire thread to be locked and ruining the discussion for everybody else", yes the post was deleted - but the thread also locked.

 

So we can see it was locked, for whatever reason, but when I wrote in #8 "sorry to see the thread 'More fighting in Thailand in the next two months?' locked by the mod. The reason for it being locked is obvious and I don't disagree with that." the bit I agreed with was the subject matter under discussion, i.e if the post had not been deleted or edited, that might have invited further posts on the same subject matter. I was not agreeing with the thread being locked.

[Guest fountainhall]

Now I understand! And of course the topic was off limits. I have written recently that the mods have a difficult role to play. But may I respectfully suggest that having deleted a post, then locking the thread and leaving the other posts on the thread makes little sense!

 

Jomtien's warning was clearly necessary. But I still suggest that any post which is deleted should be replaced by a post from a mod advising readers that a post has been deleted. That way, gaps in a discussion/debate will be self-explanatory. And it might avoid the need for threads to be locked.

[ChristianPFC]

My comment above was of a general nature and not referring to the deleted/reinstalled posts by Bob and fountainhall.

 

The limited number of my posts that were deleted on various gay Thailand boards, I had both cases: no message at all (which left me wondering if there was a technical problem when I submitted) or PM by the moderator with reason and quote of my deleted post.