General Chat

Just for info: I have had two apologies in the last month for deletions of threads I started that should not have been deleted. The crusade/vendetta had been given its usual knee-jerk validation -- but someone actually looked at the threads and wrote me non-bot replies explaining that the deletions were inappropriate, the threads did not violate anything, and apologizing.

I thought maybe there was a new broom ...

We still don't know, however, who deleted the thread.

OH well.

Janey, it's not like Eldrick to just delete, he's gone out before in the middle of a debate he's set up, and we all know they do get a bit heated by their very nature. I really don't think he would have deleted without saying something.

SRS, yes I could understand it in a way, but surely someone who has been victim to gun crime would have a very valid opinion on the current state of gun laws? Who knows? But somehow I doubt it was someone in that position.

OH well, off to do something else then...

I could understand if it is someone who has been affected by gun crime and perhaps wants to escape from discussions about it but is that really what's happened here? I was looking forward to catching up on the debate.

However, again it is GR who has the power to delete threads/posts and should be explaining as much as possible to the thread originator why it has been deleted. They really should judge whether it is reasonable for the thread to be deleted.

Edit: to clarify I mean that they shouldn't just delete automatically because someone has asked them to. They should weigh everything up.

And I was in the middle of posting a treatise on crime statistics in continuation of our discussion, TW. ;)

Are we quite sure that some outside power deleted that thread?

I'm not.

Hi TW
I'd just finished writing a long piece about Robert Sartin who lived near to me,about his 'killing rampage' throught the quiet roads in Monkseaton,Whitley Bay when i posted it went poof!! ah well....I don't often take part in debates but thought I'd give my take about gun laws etc.

So we are debating the laws on guns, and discussing the statistics across the pond, particularly in the light of many hundreds of other debates going on, on the same subject everywhere, on the radio, TV, Newspapers, internet forums, pubs clubs and cafes all over.

So who decided to take it upon themselves to be offended on behalf of someoen else again? Are we not to talk about things that have just happened, or even topics related to them? Should we just pretend its not there in the hope that it might go away?