Deleted Messages

[PeterB]

I am requesting that messages that are posted on the NSPN message board be not then removed at a later time . This leads to a thread which is very difficult for a latecomer to comprehend. While I’m by definition working with incomplete information at that point , I can sense that the original post, whether a trip report, an attached article , or just a musing, is of value and one which I would enjoy reading, whether or not everyone might be entirely in agreement with its content.

When I open up the NSPN website for my daily oats, and there’s a thread which starts with a message titled: “ * ”, followed by messages with titles like “Look at yourself Brian, you’ll hate what you see” or “You’re the one who’s a hypocrite, Ken.”, innocent bystanders such as myself are only confused and frustrated, and I would like to think that that is not the original intention of any posting on our message board. So, I would only say:

Dear NSPN member, if you post a message, I am very interested in and see intrinsic value in what you have to say, so please resist the urge to “take your toys and go home”, (that it’s only males who indulge in this kind of behavior can’t be lost on this savvy bunch) and leave your original post. If you get a reply which is arrogant, intemperate, ill-informed, insensitive, insulting, or whatever, it will probably stand on its own merits or die on the vine any way. For every real or imagined attack you receive , rest assured that there are many more of us who just want to read and learn from what you have to offer.

If this is all a big mistake and NSA has been deleting posts on our message board for national security reasons, or if this is the work of a sinister web administrator, please ignore this message. I won’t delete it.

[Brian Nystrom]

This is an issue that everyone with a message board struggles with. I like the ability to edit posts, mainly because I hate having typos in my writing. However it does allow people to change the nature of posts or delete them. The upside is that people probably feel more free to say whatever they want, since they know they can change it. The downside is that people probably feel more free to say whatever they want, since they know they can change it. ;-)

Despite the problems that editing can cause, I prefer the current system. It also seems to me that the vast majority of participants here use it as it was intended to be used. I really don't see it as something that requires action. If others feel differently, I'm open to an unedited discussion. ;-)

[ccarlson]

If a poster elects to delete or significantly edit a posting, I think that is their perogative.

[bob budd]

If anyone is counting votes I feel the poster has the prerogative to edit or remove anything they post, even if they use a "spoon".

[PeterB]

As a clarifiction: I was not asking that there be any policy change ,that this was a web administrator issue, or that people shouldn't be allowed to do this or that ; People are, of course , free to do with their messages as they please. This was just a request to individuals to not delete their own original message because a thread which is missing the substance of that original message is hard to understand.

[Fred C]

I agree with Peter. I enjoyed reading some of the posts that have been deleted and am disappointed when I return and find they have been removed. Ultimately the decision to remove or edit a posting should remain with the author but an effort should be taken to resist the temptation to take things off the board. People do want to hear what you have to say.

[Brian Nystrom]

If it was worth writing in the first place, it's worth leaving for posterity. Not that there haven't been some things I wish I hadn't said, but I won't delete them for the reasons you cite.

[oldsalty]

*

[Nick Schade]

>The upside is that people probably feel more free to say

>whatever they want, since they know they can change it. The

>downside is that people probably feel more free to say

>whatever they want, since they know they can change it. ;-)

With my bulletin boards I decided that civil discourse was best served by turning off the ability to edit (and thus delete) messages. I also make it clear that the messages may end up staying on the site forever.

My goal is to encourage people to think before they post their message. It may not always work, but I believe it tends to make the board self policing.

By deleting a post, the user is not only deleting his own material, but deleting the context of any follow up posts, thus deleting much of the value of other peoples messages.

I have no problem with the idea of proof-reading a post and correcting typos. But changing the content and meaning of a post after people have responded to it is disruptive and selfish. On my boards, changing errors is usually done with a followup message.

The operators of the NSPN board allow people to edit and that is OK. But when people delete their post, they need to understand that by doing so they do effect other people and they reduce the value of the community resource. They have every right to do what they want, but they shouldn't be surprised when other people are annoyed.

[Kevin B (RPS Coach)]

I, too, really dislike coming upon deleted posts and I think the only place where it should be used is in the classified's section. That being said, I do not think we should change policy and prevent deletion. It's the poster's post and s/he should be allowed to delete if s/he so chooses. So I second Peter's plea to those who delete and respectfully ask that you do not. You took the time to write the post so it must have value and I'm sure we'll all learn something from it (or at least be entertained by the tempest it sets off

And if people tire of settling their differences on the message board (deleting is one form of resolution), then they can always take care of things on the field of paddle

[djlewis]

>they can always take care of things on the field of paddle

Throwing down the Nordic Blue, eh?

--David.