Ass Hat
Home
News
Events
Bands
Labels
Venues
Pics
MP3s
Radio Show
Reviews
Releases
Buy$tuff
Forum
  Classifieds
  News
  Localband
  Shows
  Show Pics
  Polls
  
  OT Threads
  Other News
  Movies
  VideoGames
  Videos
  TV
  Sports
  Gear
  /r/
  Food
  
  New Thread
  New Poll
Miscellaneous
Links
E-mail
Search
End Ass Hat
login

New site? Maybe some day.
Username:
SPAM Filter: re-type this (values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
Message:


UBB enabled. HTML disabled Spam Filtering enabledIcons: (click image to insert) Show All - pop

b i u  add: url  image  video(?)
: post by succubus at 2006-03-03 16:53:31
ok so i posted a comment about my disapproval of the thread getting deleted and the mod replied:

Hi Carina,

I can understand your point about the benefit of looking back at past mistakes, but some threads seem incapable of stopping. If the moderators didn't remove them, the sniping and criticizing would go on endlessly. When the "Scapegoat" topic came up last week, I posted a message when the thread was on its fourth page. Things seemed to be getting better, so I left it up because people wanted to learn from it. Two days later, the thread was up to eight pages and there were still rude, nasty comments being made. When threads get to that point, they begin to overshadow the rest of the forum and the focus isn't even on jewelry anymore.

I'm sorry that you feel the forum has been overly PC lately. However, please note that I didn't search the forums for the posts I deleted — I was contacted by forum members who found them offensive. If somebody contacts me about an inappropriate post, it's my job to assess the situation and act accordingly. If the post uses crude language, refers to offensive activities, or is unnecessarily rude, then I delete it. Honestly, I don't understand why any of those things would add value to a discussion about jewelry.

Thanks for the feedback on the forum. If you ever have any questions, please let me know.
[default homepage] [print][12:59:49am May 18,2024
load time 0.00677 secs/10 queries]
[search][refresh page]