Poll: What power should a poster have over their posts

Poll: What power should a poster have over their posts

  • Unlimited power to delete. Unlimited power to edit.

    Votes: 66 49.6%
  • No power to delete. Unlimited power to edit.

    Votes: 23 17.3%
  • No power to delete. Restricted power to edit.

    Votes: 37 27.8%
  • No power to delete. No power to edit.

    Votes: 7 5.3%

  • Total voters
    133
"By posting your comments or images on RFF, you are giving permanent irrevocable permission for those posts and images to be used at RFF on the RFF site, even if and when you are no longer a RFF member."

The TOS isn't actually being followed (it is only if all user deleted posts/threads are resurrected)

Not true. The TOS also states " The administrators and moderators of RFF have the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread, post or posted image. "

Stephen
 
Why?

Especially when you could only zero out your first post and delete your other posts in that thread?

For the same reasons as Roland outlined.

Zeroing out the first post and deleting the rest seems like more work, especially since others can quote you and use it against you. It just seems easier to delete the entire thread.

I don't find deleted posts/threads to be that big of a deal, to be honest. I don't think that anything is SO important that it should be permanent. Likewise, I'm sure others would argue the opposite.
 
Actually, another question to those in favour of being able to delete their posts - is it something you actually make use of, or simply something you like knowing you have the option of. If the former, is it something you do very often/ moderately/ infrequently?
 
Not true. The TOS also states " The administrators and moderators of RFF have the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread, post or posted image. "

Stephen

Yes, it does *also* state that. 🙂

I agree with Roland, sometimes threads go astray, some quite quickly.

On my forum, if the OP wants a thread gone, that's a mod's job. The OP can request it. A mod makes the final decision of yay or nay. One solution short of deletion is that the thread could remain, and just the errant posts could be deleted.

The thought here is that a disinterested party (mod) is probably the best arbitrator. It's not always the well-reasoned (like Roland) making good decisions, as has been seen recently and over the past few years...

There is no right or wrong way here, of course. Just throwing out suggestions. We wouldn't be spending the time on polls and comments if we didn't care about the place. 🙂
 
The site belongs to Stephen. What we post does not belong to us.
Don't get emotional about it.
Move on. Post more.

This may sound cold, but I think that this is reality.
Limited editing should be OK.
 
I agree with Roland's post above, and it appears that about half of the folks in the poll do as well.

I did spend an hour or so working on the images I submitted to the thread that Roland decided to kill, but that is his prerogative. I think he may have been overly sensitive by a couple of negative comments that could/should just be ignored, as there were other positive contributions to a great topic about lens distortion.

But in the end, it's his thread. He started it. Let him own it.

If you're worried the originator of a thread like Camera and Coffee or Cats will someday get deleted by the OP, then start your own thread. Call it My Coffee and Cameras, or My Cats.

And for whatever reason the RFF'er who recently left, and asked the mods to delete their posts, threads and images, (which I realize contained content submitted by others), I think RFF did the right thing, and a proper courtesy.
 
But in the end, it's his thread. He started it. Let him own it.

If you're worried the originator of a thread like Camera and Coffee or Cats will someday get deleted by the OP, then start your own thread. Call it My Coffee and Cameras, or My Cats.

No disrespect, but that's just insane.

I've been to forums that tried to prevent thread duplication, none have tried to encourage it.

Forums are for SHARING, not showing and then taking it away.

But as you pointed out, more than a half seems to disagree, so...
 
Both sides have arguments that sound logical and fair (to some).
RFF has lots to offer in useful information, so I will not dwell on this issue.
 
depends on the purpose of the forum

depends on the purpose of the forum

If the forum is a business, even just wanting to pay it's hosting and support bills, then it needs growth and unique visitors, as well as retention of the existing users.

If it's a private forum, not public, and is supported by subscription fees or whatever, then those forum owners can tweak the parameters as they see fit, and even impose "insane" editing constraints.

No disrespect, but that's just insane.

I've been to forums that tried to prevent thread duplication, none have tried to encourage it.

Forums are for SHARING, not showing and then taking it away.

But as you pointed out, more than a half seems to disagree, so...
 
People seem to decide what the sentiments are based on this poll, however, I didn't vote as the correct option isn't there.

Raid is right, it is the bartenders site and I would like to thank him for allowing us into his bar. I don't have problem when he or the mods delete posts - that is part of their job. I have a problem when other people delete my posts. Is it a big issue? No.... But I still want to express my position 😀
 
If the forum is a business, even just wanting to pay it's hosting and support bills, then it needs growth and unique visitors, as well as retention of the existing users.

Probably quite off-topic, but..

I agree with this. To me a public forum like rff is like a sporting occasion;

Forum = the playing venue
Posters = the players
Moderators = the referees

Without any of the above three = no game. Equally, if any of the above are unhappy, it usually makes for a much poorer game.
 
Actually, another question to those in favour of being able to delete their posts - is it something you actually make use of, or simply something you like knowing you have the option of. If the former, is it something you do very often/ moderately/ infrequently?

I delete pretty regularly. I have posts deleted by moderators without my input as well, tho fewer than I delete myself. No account for taste.

If you're worried the originator of a thread like Camera and Coffee or Cats will someday get deleted by the OP, then start your own thread. Call it My Coffee and Cameras, or My Cats.

Isn't that what the gallery is?
 
@murchu - my reasons are if I've sold something, there's no reason to leave the clutter of the completed transaction around, or if I have a question about something, and find the answer, I don't want to burden folks typing long responses if I've already resolved a situation.

I don't delete my threads if there is a lot of good content and intention in it, but someone poopp poos it. I just ignore those posts, and focus and reply to the positive ones. If for some reason, it just keeps going south, then I might delete it.

Sometimes I will post a cute cat photo, and then find an even cuter one to post. But in these cases, I usually don't delete the earlier one...so I do sometimes support the no-delete idealists 😉
 
@murchu - my reasons are if I've sold something, there's no reason to leave the clutter of the completed transaction around, or if I have a question about something, and find the answer, I don't want to burden folks typing long responses if I've already resolved a situation.

Can understand the deletion of sales posts, but would have thought a thread you'd begun to get an answer to something would have been helpful to any others coming after you, rather than the need for others to ask the same question again..
 
Back
Top Bottom