deleted Gite post

[SVP!]

sorry no choice but to air this in open forum, as none of the mods have had the courtesy to PM me.

Why was my post recommending a Gite been deleted? which rule did you dream up this time to support your actions?

It was a recommendation pure and simple and nothing else, how is it any different from a post by someone recommending a certain type of cheese that can be bought at Leclerc?

LF need to review their use of these Mods, their behaviour of late has been questionable, are they trained in anyway?

[Hoddy]

SVP1.

I removed your post recommending a gite late last night because a similar post recommending the same gite for the same week had been the subject of a complaint from a member and a whole thread had been removed.

I emailed the members who had posted after you and made a mental note that I would send a note to you first thing this morning. I thought you needed a fuller explanation than the members who had posted after you because they are members of longer standing. In the event, however, workmen arrived this morning and turned my phone off before breakfast and will be back to turn it off again after lunch. I am sorry that I wasn’t able to PM you as I’d planned.

Your comments that the moderator’s behaviour has of late been questionable suggests that although you’ve only just begun to post you have in fact been watching for some time in which case I’m surprised that you didn’t notice that this gite had already been the subject of a recommendation and that a thread had been deleted.

Hoddy

[JohnM]

I'm not a mod so can not give chapter and verse on this, but I would guess the following came into the equation.

There is a very fuzzy line between what is a deliberate Advert and what is a casual recommendation. Unfortunately, a number of low life have abused the spirit of the forum by pretending to be a happy customer, whereas they are really trying to push their product / service. Sadly, in clamping down on this abuse, a number of innocent people have had posts removed. I guess the mod took into account the style of words you used, the fact that you haven't had many posts and "plumped" for it being an advert. I didn't see the post so can not even guess which camp you are in. I hope that helps.

 

[SVP!]

so assumptiopns have been made and rules applied based on me being a new comer and not as in the words of Hoddy 'long standing member'

further re-enforces the actions of the Mods of late, talk about judging a book by it's cover.

I also see Hoddy nicely side steps answering my question about how my post is any diff from that of recommending x product at Leclerc. Also am to have knowledge of each and every post before posting my own, I think not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tresco]

A surprising number of new members seem to be making their first posts on similar 'themes', rather than the more usual questions (Where do I, How do I.....).

Also am to have knowledge of each and every post before posting my own, I think not. (SVP!)

And yet you seem to think you know everything that the mods do or don't do. Seems a little strange to me.

[Tourangelle]

[quote]so assumptiopns have been made and rules applied based on me being a new comer and not as in the words of Hoddy 'long standing member' further re-enforces the actions of the Mods of late, talk about ...[/quote]

Talk about making assumptions! You assume that Hoddy was in some way ill intentioned towards you, whereas I read that post as an apology from someone who wanted to give you a fuller explanation than would have been given to somebody who the mods know has been posting for a long time. How are the mods supposed to know who has been lurking? The truth is, we don't know you, we don't know that you are not advertising your own place. If you start extolling the virtues of bonne maman jam or Herza ham, then yes, I suppose you could have shares, but, frankly, you wouldn't use this site to advertise.

[Tony F Dordogne]

As it's clear from other threads that the Mods have access to all sorts of interesting internet info, perhaps they can check when somebody who purports to be a first-timer actually joined up, which will show whether they are truly a 'lurker' or one of the resident trolls carrying on their sad little campaigns.

If they are not lurkers, when somebody says that they are and they are not, they're obviosly up to mischief and are telling fibs and should be bounced out.

[Dick Smith]

Tony - I heartily agree.

[Hoddy]

SVP!

You are right – I did make assumptions. Your post was very similar, in that it was for the same week in the same villa, to a post which had been the subject of debate and then objection and had therefore been deleted. For that reason I assumed, especially because it was your first post,  that you hadn’t read it.

The posts which followed yours, from longer-term posters,  mentioned the similarity to the earlier deleted thread so I knew that they had read it. It was for this reason that I was going to give you a more detailed reason for deleting it.

This morning, however, you say that the moderator’s have been making some poor decisions lately so I can  assume that you have read at least some earlier posts and will know that this is not the only instance of its kind that we have had.

TonyF – the moderator’s access to information is quite limited as Quillan explains in the “When to moderate” post. I did look at VSP!’s email address and I’m pretty sure it’s not his/her  real name, but I didn’t think that was a reason to delete the post. I can only repeat it was deleted because it was very similar to one which had already been the subject of an objection from a member and which had therefore been deleted.

Hoddy

 

[SVP!]

[quote]A surprising number of new members seem to be making their first posts on similar 'themes', rather than the more usual questions (Where do I, How do I.....). Also am to have knowledge of each and e...[/quote]

chill Tresco and try and get your head around this -

a new member to the forum does not mean a new comer to France and doesn't always need to post where do I, how do I questions!

 

 

[Tony F Dordogne]

Oh dear, SVP! has only been a member since 20.08 yesterday - it's in his/her profile - and again he/she is banging on about what Mods have been talking about recently.

So, unless the newbie has read, understood and inwardly digested all the messages to do with Mods and what they do or don't do, the tone seems to exhibit a degree of longer-standing familiarity.

And, can't be a lurker, can't lurk for under 24 hours really, so that argument/reason/silly excuse goes out the window.

 

[josa]

Hi - without getting involved in the substantive issue here, I am not sure what "a lurker" is and why it is so bad? Can someone explain so I can at least follow the thread (and possibly avoid being a "lurker" myself - whatever it is!)

I read this forum for some time without logging in as most of my questions were asked by others and I could glean the information without asking questions - I only registered and logged in when I had something to post. Did this make me a "lurker"?

[JohnM]

I am sure somebody will correct me if they think I'm wrong but I don't think anyone thinks that "Lurking" is wrong, it is only used to describe those who have been having a look for a while (lurking in the shadows) but not felt the need to post so therefore not registered.

I think (and again I am sure somebody will want to correct me / enforce their own view ) that a number of people just feel that there is something unusual about this particular posters standing. It seems odd that they should use their very first post to recommend something that was subject to debate so recently and their second ever post to complain about being deleted.

If they are innocent of all charges of not honouring the spirit of the forum, I for one am sorry that their first encounter as not been good. If they are guilty of abusing the spirit, I wish they had had the good grace to admit that it was a fair cop.

 

[Tresco]

josa, re 'Lurker' it is a horrible sounding word for what most of us probably did before registering.

SVP! seems to be rather hot under the collar, perhaps s/he should take his/her own advice to 'chill'.

[Hoddy]

What's wrong with lurking ? Absolutely nothing at all in my opinion - I did it for ages before I gained enough confidence to post.  However, to lurk and then appear to have not read any of the previous posts seems a little odd.

Hoddy

 

[Chauffour]

come on SVP, tell us your secret...

 

...give us the name of that wanderful cheese on sale at Leclerc...

[Coco]

As it's clear from other threads that the Mods have access to all sorts of interesting internet info, perhaps they can check when somebody who purports to be a first-timer actually joined up, which will show whether they are truly a 'lurker' or one of the resident trolls carrying on their sad little campaigns.

Oh dear, SVP! has only been a member since 20.08 yesterday - it's in his/her profile - and again he/she is banging on about what Mods have been talking about recently.

Have things changed now then?  I thought anyone could read the Forum but you could only contribute if you signed up.  Consequently you could "lurk" for years before becoming a member and making a contribution.  What about all the "guests" that are present at various times on the Forum?  I have a friend who made her first (and only) posting this Spring but she has been "lurking" here since the Forum started, some five years ago, longer than people like TeamedUp with in excess of 3000 postings.  Checking their membership status will not tell you anything about how long they have been around.

So, unless the newbie has read, understood and inwardly digested all the messages to do with Mods and what they do or don't do, the tone seems to exhibit a degree of longer-standing familiarity.

And, can't be a lurker, can't lurk for under 24 hours really, so that argument/reason/silly excuse goes out the window.

Sorry Tony, but it seems that your argument is the one that goes out the window.

[Tony F Dordogne]

The point I was trying to make is that when somebody was challenged about posting rather strong messages a few days ago, their reply was 'how do you know I'm not a lurker', their choice of description, not mine.

My point was that if somebody used the excuse of knowing what was going on because they had been lurking and reading what had been going on, the argument would not hold water this time because they had only joined the Forum so recently.

On a broader point, it seems to me that what the trolls are about is starting arguments and being disruptive.

When we get into this sort of discussion, aren't we playing their game? 

[SVP!]

please! aka SVP! here

how UNFAIR is this, the powers that be have deleted SVP! from the system, no PM no warnings, just a big delete.

I make no further comment on this action, I'll let the people decide for themselves.

 

[Hoddy]

Please! What are you talking about ? As far as I can see SVP! is still a member.

EDIT: I really did check out SVP!'s email last night and it seemed OK - now I know that Will the Conq did too and that when he checked it wasn't !

Please be assured SVP! that you have not been deleted from the system. What I wrote was true at the time I wrote it.

Because it was inaccurate I have deleted the two posts which followed.

Hoddy

[Will]

As Hoddy said, SVP mentioned earlier about being unable to post and thought he/she had been banned. Forum Admin has looked into it and the member records showed that SVP's login e-mail address was incomplete, which is why the system would not accept it. No question of a ban. The invalid log in data has now been deleted, so, SVP, you can either continue to use your later log in or reactivate the original yourself.

[pinkfluff<P>Big Wet Drops and Lots of Them, Are a Sure Sign of Rain!<P>]

Dont envy these  moderators hope they get paid a lot I would not do the job for love nor money

Reminds me of the X wife we had a gardener and I always thought he looked a little daft but he summed her up perfect one day ,when after being told that it was too dry to cut the grass as it would burn when the previous day it had been too wet he said  "you moan when its dry and you moan when its wet"

[cyclebum]

Although not a fan of moderaters, without their efforts in the case of 'recommendations' one only has to look at another popular French forum to see what can happen.

It goes something like this. (names are fictitious - honest)

Just been to the 'Hobbit Inn'. their steak pies are to die for. The owners Fred and Ginger were so welcoming. We will be going to the quiz on Saturday. Alice and George give us a ring to let us know if your going. Hope Steve and Elsie you'll be their again. Don't forget to book or you'll not get a seat... and so on.

Then Steve and Elsie and Alice and George post similar drivel and on it goes for a page or two.

The moderators competly ignore all this because they are too busy deleting posts where somone is asking for 'WORK' rather than asking for a 'JOB'.