Mercury Telecom

[The Ombudsman]

No longer wish to disclose information

Edited April 7, 2010 by The Ombudsman

[Cattolica]

Unless back in August poor old Buzby was talking to himself, it seems that yet again another forum has removed posts from a thread about Mercury Telecoms. It makes me wonder just what this company is trying to hide?

[buzby]

I've actually got the full thread, so I know I wasn't imagining the conversation! It's a shame the forum software sneakily renumbers the posts as if nothing has been altered.

 

Now, I can replace the missing items in an omnibus posting, would a mod like to agree to this, or explain why the intervening posts were removed without comment?

[jonni2bad]

If posts are removed then you would not be permitted to repost them.

 

There may be many reasons why posts are withdrawn and we don't leave comments, nor will we. We simply look to maintain the best interests of the forum.

[buzby]

If posts are removed then you would not be permitted to repost them.

 

Really? And how would I be aware of such removal? My posts are intact and as I have recieved no CAGBot PMs advising the these items have become 'unapproved', it would be reasonable to assume that there has been a software glitch and they've simply dropped off - in pretty much the same mysterious way I lost 3 reputation blobs when a red reputation mark appeared, only to disappear with nobody supposedly having any clue as to what had happened, apart from being 'one of those things'.

 

Why not be pro-active and check - I'm quite happy to restore the missing posts in an omnibus message, unless you care to confirm that CAG has indeed removed them without comment, in which case I'll not restore them. I can't be more helpful than that.

 

[Bookworm]

Really? And how would I be aware of such removal?

Errrr, by the fact you can't see them anymore?

 

My posts are intact and as I have recieved no CAGBot PMs advising the these items have become 'unapproved',

Well, if they're not your posts, and by your admission, your own posts are intact, why would YOU receive those CAGbot messages? :-?

[buzby]

Oh - only insofar as if a removed message had contained a quote from my own message, I would have indeed have received such a removal notice. I'm surprised you find this confusing.

 

But let's not dance round the issue - a message with [EDIT] shown to indicate the removed section is acceptable as far as it goes. To make it disappear as if it never had been there, then renumber the forum posts to make the deletion totally invisible is an abomination.

 

However, since the Forum software is so flaky in many respects - the situation described would clearly be attributed to yet another glitch, so a restoration would be seen by many as a public service. As TPRG clearly have not come out and stated there HAS been a removal, it would be reasonable to assume a database error.

[Bookworm]

Oh - only insofar as if a removed message had contained a quote from my own message, I would have indeed have received such a removal notice. I'm surprised you find this confusing.

No, you wouldn't. Believe me, don't believe me, and I can't speak for other forums with other operating software, but you will NOT get a CAGbot if you are not the originator of a post.

But let's not dance round the issue - a message with [EDIT] shown to indicate the removed section is acceptable as far as it goes. To make it disappear as if it never had been there, then renumber the forum posts to make the deletion totally invisible is an abomination.

I wasn't aware there was an issue to dance around. However, I would suggest that any issues with the way the software works when posts have been removed/moderated should be addressed to VBulletin, the creators of said software.

 

However, since the Forum software is so flaky in many respects - the situation described would clearly be attributed to yet another glitch, so a restoration would be seen by many as a public service. As TPRG clearly have not come out and stated there HAS been a removal, it would be reasonable to assume a database error

Personally, I saw J2B's reply as being quite clear that if posts had been removed, noone would be allowed to repost them. The clue is in the sentences: "If posts are removed then you would not be permitted to repost them.

 

There may be many reasons why posts are withdrawn and we don't leave comments, nor will we. We simply look to maintain the best interests of the forum. "

 

Me, I would work on the assumption that posts have been removed for reasons known to the site's owners and leave it at that.

[buzby]

Personally, I saw J2B's reply as being quite clear that if posts had been removed, noone would be allowed to repost them. The clue is in the sentences: "If posts are removed then you would not be permitted to repost them.

 

Do tell me how anyone could be made aware that a post HAD been removed if CAG had not chosen to to at least admit to wielding the electronic equivalent of a blue pen? Anyone could legitimately repost noting that it had somehow disappeared and was being helpful be restoring it.

 

If you are supporting the surreptitious removal of messages because it is in the 'best interests' then cleary such devious tactic does not offend you as it does me. If CAG wished to remove posts, it is entitled to do so as it owns the ball, but to do so in the hope that nobody will notice does the forum, and its members a considerable disservice. If you cannot see this, or believe it not to be an issue, would make me re-evaluate your reasoning of acceptable conduct.

 

If a mod wants to pull a message - do it, but at least own up to it. None of this subterfuge.

 

Me, I would work on the assumption that posts have been removed for reasons known to the site's owners and leave it at that.

 

And risk the credibility of the site and its hard-won reputation? So much for being fearless upholder of truth? Sorry, lets not just remove the bits that offend, we can make them disappear and the punters won't even notice.

 

Having looked at what WAS removed, all I found were verifiable facts, and hardly contentious so perhaps the fearless post remover could at least account for the actions? We'd expect this from the firms we complain about, why should CAG mods be immune? (And it wasn't;t even my posts that were removed!).

 

As for your suggestion that complaints for software glitches should be addressed to vBulletin... I've still not stopped laughing. If you bought a faulty car, would you complain to Ford or the dealer you bought it from? It's not up to me to complain to vBulletin that the s/w CAG uses is buggy or has some naff features. The answer is for CAG to evaluate other products - but please not the one used by MSE.

[jonni2bad]

It is quite simple - you asked if you could repost those missing (and thank you for asking) and we said no.

 

We are not obliged to explain to anyone why we remove posts, although we would typically do so to the originator.

 

I'm sorry that you seem to view the removal of posts as though it were in some way 'offensive' (my terminology) but this is not intended.

 

We have made the position as clear as it will ever be, so I will not comment any further on this thread in relation to this matter.

[Bookworm]

Oh, yawn yawn and more yawn. Laugh, cry, whinge: Buzby, I. don't. care. I don't care what you think. Of me, of how you think this forum is run, and whether you want to imagine great big conspiracies to hide the truth.

 

Yes, my post will probably get CAGbotted and to save your usual primadonna behaviour which makes you think you can bitch about everyone one else, but go crying to mummy the moment you get one back at you, I will report it myself. Since you have said you get notifications, you should still be able to read this anyway.

 

All you found were "verifiable" facts? Well, good for you and thank goodness you're not the one running this place, it would have been shut after 3 weeks.

 

Ok, let me break it down to you in small manageable chunks: Yes, odds are that posts were removed. No, noone has to tell you why. The author of the moderated/removed posts would have notification however and would usually also have had a PM explaining to them why their post(s) had been removed, and that's all you need to know. In the case of some of our slightly more intelligent users, they even usually accept the explanation. As for the other participants on the thread, frankly, it's none of their business. I'd even venture as far as to say that discussing the removal/moderation of those posts with a 3rd person could be a breach of the DPA.

 

And since you are yet again twisting my words (that's new! Not.) I didn't say anything about software "glitches", I said "the way the software works", meaning the way it is programmed to run, ie when posts get removed/moderated, they don't have a post number and so look as if they were never there. That is something which is an integral part of VBulletin, I doubt there is a plug-in to change that. But then, considering that you thought you would get notifs when a post in which you were quoted was moderated, it's hardly shocking that you seem unable to grasp this simple concept.

 

As for your analogy of the car, you are of course yet again totally wrong. If the concept of software is too complicated for you and we need to resort to a car analogy, then a more apt one would be that Vbulletin is the car, CAG the driver and you a passenger. The car works fine, the driver is quite happy with it, but there's always one passenger who has to complain about something or another, isn't there?

 

Well, I am not a member of the team anymore, which is great as it allows me to finally express my opinion freely instead of tiptoeing around that great ego of yours. I will however use my knowledge of the last 30 months or so behind the scenes to express this clearly: Yes, posts are likely to have been moderated. Get over it.

 

Bookie, out and about to report this post to CAGbot.

[Bookworm]

Ooops, sorry J, it took me a good deal longer than you to post this.

[Computer Bafoon]

Buzby...

 

The renumbering of posts shows that posts have bee removed. Sometimes, posts are made 'invisible'. So, on another Mercury thread, the post numbers are not consecutive and the 'invisible' posts can only be seen by the original poster (and only when he/she is logged in). In that event, not even the poster is advised of their posts becoming 'invisible'.

 

The poster is also not advised that ALL his/her existing posts (even non-contentious posts) on ALL threads will now be INVISIBLE TO EVERYONE except to themselves; all future posts will also be invisible too. Any search done for posts under the username will find zero matches.

 

Finally, any PMs that user sends NEVER reaches the intended recipient; the presumption is that PMs simply end up in Admin's inbox instead!!!!

 

Now, that really is censorship of the worst kind!

Edited July 30, 2008 by Computer Bafoon

[Cattolica]

Unless back in August poor old Buzby was talking to himself, it seems that yet again another forum has removed posts from a thread about Mercury Telecoms. It makes me wonder just what this company is trying to hide?

 

Gentlemen, Gentlemen,

 

I am sorry that I posted the above as the point seemed to have been lost.

 

Yes, it was meant to point out that the thread had been censored, something I had seen far too often when facts or opinions were posted about a certain company.

 

Like many, even though not involved, I have taken an interest since I first read of the threats made against forums and a certain person of another forum fame who was arrested and had his computers confiscated for a period for posting his accounts of his dealings with a certain company. Sadly he will now not allow any postings on a certain subject, so the bully boy tactics worked.

 

Forums such as this bring these injustices to light, to help and warn all of us and long may they do so. To bow to threats and remove posts when 'true and factual' accounts are posted allows companies to continue to trade in such manner.

 

We are the losers.

[buzby]

Oh, yawn yawn and more yawn. Laugh, cry, whinge: Buzby, I. don't. care. I don't care what you think. Of me, of how you think this forum is run, and whether you want to imagine great big conspiracies to hide the truth.

 

An excellent rant! Funny when you are criticised for supplying misleasing information you never respond... (quite recently you views which eant contrary to the DPA and how wonderful the TS were at assisying consumers). But don't worry, I'll try to keep you right.

[buzby]

It is quite simple - you asked if you could repost those missing (and thank you for asking) and we said no.

We have made the position as clear as it will ever be, so I will not comment any further on this thread in relation to this matter.

 

Just before you go - are we reading the same thread? You did NOT at any time say (admit) that the 'missing messages' were removed by CAG. Therefore there is still no issue about replacing them.

 

What you actually said was 'IF the messages were removed' which I'm afraid is a totally different thing. As I have repeatedly pointed out, using the tactic hilighted here ANY CAG member could rightfully replace the missing messages unless there was an advisory that they had been removed.

 

Yoiur present stance (and in my humble view, untenable) is that any message that appeared then disappeared has been removed by TBTB and should not therefore be replaced or commented on. I

 

f you want to cofirm that those messages WERE actually removed, fine - I have no argument with that (your ball/ballpark etc) but to blithely state nothing ('if they were removed') then subsequently thank me for not reposting meaning to any reasonable person there was no 'if' about it - is not playing fair by the members. It is THAT I find totally unfair.

[The Ombudsman]

No longer wish to disclose information

Edited April 7, 2010 by The Ombudsman

[locutus]

Buzbys point is that he has the conversation saved, and if it was accidentally removed or dissapeared due to a software glitch then he could help restore it, but if it were deleted by a moderator then thats fine. (even though it does make him look like he's going crazy talking to himself and answering questions that were not asked LOL)

[The Ombudsman]

No longer wish to disclose information

.

Edited April 7, 2010 by The Ombudsman

[davethorp]

Tragic news this is just devastating. Oh wait..... no it isn't!

[The Ombudsman]

No longer wish to disclose information

Edited April 7, 2010 by The Ombudsman

[The Ombudsman]

No longer wish to disclose information

Edited April 7, 2010 by The Ombudsman

[The Ombudsman]

No longer wish to disclose information

Edited April 7, 2010 by The Ombudsman

[The Ombudsman]

No longer wish to disclose information

Edited April 7, 2010 by The Ombudsman

[The Ombudsman]

No longer wish to disclose information

Edited April 7, 2010 by The Ombudsman