Missing thread

[Zippy]

How dare you!

I am not old.

OK. Remove 'old' from that post. Does that sound any better?
Nope, thought it wouldn't.

[Gonzo]

OK. Remove 'old' from that post. Does that sound any better?
Nope, thought it wouldn't.

Ah yes. Much better.

[Clippy]

I see. Reading the thread you do indeed seem to have a vendetta as SY01 suggests. Call me picky but the vendetta logo is a dead giveaway. Is this modding? I belong to many forums online, and while SY01's protestations seem childish they are valid IMHO and the board has done little to address these, but has done much to confirm his suspicions.

Why is this?

Have banned your sock puppets. V poor show.

Truly pathetic - creating sock puppets to continue your argument after you have flounced off.

[NickFitz]

It may, or may not, have something to do with a certain former poster who, IIRC, demanded admin delete their id and everything that they had ever posted when they flounced, to use the modern vernacular. This was not something that admin was going to comply with.

I think I know of whom you speak

IMHO, it's good to have a policy of refusing to delete stuff, at least once others have responded and their contributions as well as that of the OP have entered the record. The most important thing is that it gives the site a weapon against those who would seek to harm the forums at a later stage by threats, after the manner you describe.

(Those who end up failing to publish what they wanted to publish and throw their hands up in despair may perhaps be excused, although that's how we got TPD.)

People should accept that if they publish something on t'Internet, no matter how small or large, it has been said and is there for all to see. This is why, for example, Slashdot doesn't delete comments except on one occasion (and guess whose fault that was?) which happened in its younger days and, I suspect, would not happen now.

Still, if RH decided to delete it, there we are. It contradicts the official line though. Sorry, RH, but I think you were wrong.

Anyway, I think SY01 is OK, but he ought to lighten up when it comes to something as trivial as an infraction. I hope he returns once his ban has ended, but hopefully not in the style of Churchill, for there was weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth (yet much hilarity for the rest of us )

[NotAllThere]

...

I hope I am not overeacting. nerd

Sheesh, MF, you're such a girl.

What the? SuitU banned? gone forever?

Where will we get our entertainment from?

No, only temporarily. I certainly wouldn't like him to vanish forever, because, despite certain apparently paranoid leanings, his posts do add a bit of life and colour to General. Anyway, he inspired my new avatar.

[realityhack]

IMHO, it's good to have a policy of refusing to delete stuff, at least once others have responded and their contributions as well as that of the OP have entered the record. The most important thing is that it gives the site a weapon against those who would seek to harm the forums at a later stage by threats, after the manner you describe....

...Still, if RH decided to delete it, there we are. It contradicts the official line though. Sorry, RH, but I think you were wrong.

You know, you're right. I was a tad quick to hit the delete button. Regardless of how banal I thought the thread was, NAT was right just to move it to LR. Plus, following the rationale above, the thread will be undeleted.

My apologies.

[MarillionFan]

You know, you're right. I was a tad quick to hit the delete button. Regardless of how banal I thought the thread was, NAT was right just to move it to LR. Plus, following the rationale above, the thread will be undeleted.

My apologies.

You apologised!!!!

Bedwetter

[Boudica]

You apologised!!!!

Bedwetter

RH is a gent.

hint! hint!

[NickFitz]

You know, you're right. I was a tad quick to hit the delete button. Regardless of how banal I thought the thread was, NAT was right just to move it to LR. Plus, following the rationale above, the thread will be undeleted.

My apologies.

[AtW]

My apologies.