Options
Genuinely confused
littletaffygirl
Posts: 156
Forum Member
✭
So I start a thread about a strictly matter (which I won't mention again) - three people comment that this is already a matter that has been debated in other threads that have been closed down ... And then my thread gets closed. I didn't think I said anything controversial. Just linked to a story in the national press about strictly. My questions therefore are (and they are genuine ones)
1. How am i supposed to know there have already been threads abouts something if they are closed/removed?
2. Why do threads talking about a matter in the national press and on the news section of this website get closed/removed.
1. How am i supposed to know there have already been threads abouts something if they are closed/removed?
2. Why do threads talking about a matter in the national press and on the news section of this website get closed/removed.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
It will have been removed because there were two other threads that it cause very heated debates that started to get out of hand with different sides supporting their favourite. As you can imagine it started to get rather personal so the threads were removed and I guess the moderators don't want it happening again.
I have no idea what the thread was but can hazard guess though and I am not sure why the mods seem quick to close some threads and not others
I guess we just have to concentrate on other things
The perfect explanation of what's wrong with the subject
:rolleyes:
So how does it work then? Someone takes offence, presses alert and then the post is closed? Or do moderators just look out for duplicate posts (figure it can't be that though, as there are hundreds on whether Bruce should retire!)
Thank you jwren.
I genuinely didn't know I was rehashing. The story only blipped on my radar today as I'd missed it. I came here to see if there was any truth to it as I don't believe anything in the daily mail. Found nothing. Looked at the dancers twitter instead. Made the mistake of commenting. Severely and instantly rebuked! Whoops! Just wanted to clarify whether I broken any actual rules or just annoyed some users who are on here enough to see all stories before they are deleted.
What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Where it matters is where someone who sets themselves up to be an example is then found wanting.
The Daily Mail. A great example of journalistic integrity and objectivity. :eek:
"lawyerzzz" sounds so much better
This is my guess as well, since the mods are pulling threads on this topic, I think they are worried about the possibility of legal action. It was all discussed but apparently can't be discussed any more and as such I am reporting my own post so no one else gets in trouble over it.
Maaate! No rebuke here. It's just there's history. We're all Too Badly Behaved to talk about things sensibly.