Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Yesterday I saw a thread that contained around 10 posts regarding the size of ball pythons. I looked at a few and intended to go back and read the rest. I wasted a fair amount of time just now looking for that thread before realizing that the whole thing had been pulled. My browser history indicates it was: How big do they get, Need your pictures!!

What in the world was the problem with those innocuous posts? If any of them somehow violated your terms of service, why weren’t only those specifically dealt with? As I recall, the ability to remove only "offending" posts was put forth as a big plus with the new system. Can someone shed some light?

Thank you,
Joan

well, if i remember correctly, someone posted a pic that they stated specifically *wasn't* their photo, and they didn't know whose it was... so it's possible that got it yanked...

ya never know...

bc

The photo you reference was taken by a friend of mine of one of my animals! And it’s been floating around both the old and new forums since last year with no brouhaha, so I doubt that was the reason the entire thread was yanked. But like you say, “ya never know…”

FYI, if you access this page, you can see photos of two different “12 pound balls”. I’ve lightened up both photos slightly. In the one someone posted here yesterday, my shirt looked black. It’s actually medium blue.

-Joan

>>well, if i remember correctly, someone posted a pic that they stated specifically *wasn't* their photo, and they didn't know whose it was... so it's possible that got it yanked...
>>
>>ya never know...
>>
>>
>>bc

Numerous posts disappeared from the "Iguanas" site as well, and we have inquired as to why. Those posts were also harmless, and there was no reason anyone knows of that would require them to be deleted. Maybe technical problem???

Wendy

First to get all the wordy boring stuff out of the way...

Use of our sites and services is a privilege and not a right. Please be aware that as individuals registering and using our sites and services, everyone is agreeing that they have read, and will abide by, our Terms of Service. Community members at any time can review the terms of service here: http://forum.kingsnake.com/shared/tos.html (Pet Hobbyist Site Rules/TOS).

We make it very clear to folks in the Terms of Service that they need to be aware that if they violate those rules, OnlineHobbyist.com, Inc. may delete or edit their messages, contact their internet service provider, have their account terminated, cancel their advertising, and/or block their access to our web site. We reserve the right to refuse service, limit access, or terminate a user's site privileges at our discretion.

Although from time to time a host or staff member may warn a user about a violation (via a courtesy email letter), or post a general warning to a forum, photo gallery, or chat room, we have no policy guaranteeing that anyone will be warned about violations on their account, nor any specific number or type of violations that may result in action against their account.

Any public discussion of actions made against a user's account will be removed. We will not discuss any action against a user's account with anyone but the individual themselves.

If you have had your ability to log in, post, or upload on/to the site rescinded, or had posts or images removed, or had your access to chat rooms blocked, you may contact the Kingsnake.com site coordinator and appeal the action.

Ok, now having gotten all that wordy stuff put aside, about thread removals:

While it is true we now have the ability to remove an individual post and not have to also put up with removing the subthread responses attached to it, there is still some accountability/problems involved with having to deal with the resultant 'orphan posts'.

If the post being removed is the original post of a thread/discussion, then the entire discussion will be removed regardless if the subresponses are breaking the rules or not. It is very disruptive to have a series of 'orphan posts' from one discussion get pushed up and into the next discussion above it as they have no bearing what-so-ever on that other conversation. It is essentially two different conversations getting mushed together because the main post of the one thread was removed for whatever violation.

When dealing with the removal of posts from within an ongoing discussion... Like as what happens when a main post is removed, the resultant response posts get mushed up & into the next available thread. Since we are talking about a post within an ongoing thread it's not so much of a problem as when dealing with the main post of a thread itself - the subresponses just get mushed up into the next subthread in that conversation. Depending on the nature of the post actually being removed, one of three things may happen. 1) A single post is removed but any orphan responses relating to that post will remain up as long as it does not disrupt the flow of the conversation. 2) If the response 'orhpan' posts are not able to stand up on their own (after getting pushed up into the next subthread response segment above it) and require that 'hidden' post in order to make sense of that side conversation then those orphan posts will also be removed. 3) If the orphan posts from within a discussion are able to stand on their own after the one post is removed but it is deemed that they themselves are likely to cause (or do cause) disruption on the forums by the members than if they had just been removed from the outset then they will be removed.

The thread in question that you are referring to: the main post of the thread was in direct violation of the terms of service and thus the entire discussion was pulled as a result of its removal. As to the actual violation incurred by that post and by that member I cannot comment on here. Only that person whose post it was may contact the Kingsnake.com site coordinator to discuss the actions relating to their account.

________

PHWyvern
Kingsnake.com Forum Leader
InsectHobbyist Site Coordinator/Forum Leader
ExoticHobbyist Site Coordinator/Forum Leader

PetHobbyist Community
http://www.pethobbyist.com

You are making things unnecessarily difficult for yourself. If you deem the main post unsuitable, just leave the subject header in place (or come up with some boilerplate like, uh, post deleted), then there wouldn’t be any “orphan posts”. If someone opened the “disappeared” main post, they would find your standard screed:

Error: Sorry, This forum is currently being updated, please try again later.

By now everyone knows what that means! But all the other posts would be laid out in their original order. Give us some credit for being able to carry on conversations even when someone drops (rather, is dropped) out. Your current policy (Homer’s been a bad boy, so we’re going to have to spank you all) is, of course, unfair. I put some thought into what I say and write. I don’t violate your policies. It is annoying in the extreme to find that I’ve wasted my time and my words are gone.

So, how about adopting this change?

-Joan

>>First to get all the wordy boring stuff out of the way...
>>
>>Use of our sites and services is a privilege and not a right. Please be aware that as individuals registering and using our sites and services, everyone is agreeing that they have read, and will abide by, our Terms of Service. Community members at any time can review the terms of service here: http://forum.kingsnake.com/shared/tos.html (Pet Hobbyist Site Rules/TOS).
>>
>>We make it very clear to folks in the Terms of Service that they need to be aware that if they violate those rules, OnlineHobbyist.com, Inc. may delete or edit their messages, contact their internet service provider, have their account terminated, cancel their advertising, and/or block their access to our web site. We reserve the right to refuse service, limit access, or terminate a user's site privileges at our discretion.
>>
>>Although from time to time a host or staff member may warn a user about a violation (via a courtesy email letter), or post a general warning to a forum, photo gallery, or chat room, we have no policy guaranteeing that anyone will be warned about violations on their account, nor any specific number or type of violations that may result in action against their account.
>>
>>Any public discussion of actions made against a user's account will be removed. We will not discuss any action against a user's account with anyone but the individual themselves.
>>
>>If you have had your ability to log in, post, or upload on/to the site rescinded, or had posts or images removed, or had your access to chat rooms blocked, you may contact the Kingsnake.com site coordinator and appeal the action.
>>
>>
>>
>>Ok, now having gotten all that wordy stuff put aside, about thread removals:
>>
>>While it is true we now have the ability to remove an individual post and not have to also put up with removing the subthread responses attached to it, there is still some accountability/problems involved with having to deal with the resultant 'orphan posts'.
>>
>>If the post being removed is the original post of a thread/discussion, then the entire discussion will be removed regardless if the subresponses are breaking the rules or not. It is very disruptive to have a series of 'orphan posts' from one discussion get pushed up and into the next discussion above it as they have no bearing what-so-ever on that other conversation. It is essentially two different conversations getting mushed together because the main post of the one thread was removed for whatever violation.
>>
>>When dealing with the removal of posts from within an ongoing discussion... Like as what happens when a main post is removed, the resultant response posts get mushed up & into the next available thread. Since we are talking about a post within an ongoing thread it's not so much of a problem as when dealing with the main post of a thread itself - the subresponses just get mushed up into the next subthread in that conversation. Depending on the nature of the post actually being removed, one of three things may happen. 1) A single post is removed but any orphan responses relating to that post will remain up as long as it does not disrupt the flow of the conversation. 2) If the response 'orhpan' posts are not able to stand up on their own (after getting pushed up into the next subthread response segment above it) and require that 'hidden' post in order to make sense of that side conversation then those orphan posts will also be removed. 3) If the orphan posts from within a discussion are able to stand on their own after the one post is removed but it is deemed that they themselves are likely to cause (or do cause) disruption on the forums by the members than if they had just been removed from the outset then they will be removed.
>>
>>The thread in question that you are referring to: the main post of the thread was in direct violation of the terms of service and thus the entire discussion was pulled as a result of its removal. As to the actual violation incurred by that post and by that member I cannot comment on here. Only that person whose post it was may contact the Kingsnake.com site coordinator to discuss the actions relating to their account.
>>
>>________
>>
>>PHWyvern
>>Kingsnake.com Forum Leader
>>InsectHobbyist Site Coordinator/Forum Leader
>>ExoticHobbyist Site Coordinator/Forum Leader
>>
>>PetHobbyist Community
>>http://www.pethobbyist.com

>>You are making things unnecessarily difficult for yourself. If you deem the main post unsuitable, just leave the subject header in place (or come up with some boilerplate like, uh, post deleted), then there wouldn’t be any “orphan posts”. If someone opened the “disappeared” main post, they would find your standard screed:
>>
>>Error: Sorry, This forum is currently being updated, please try again later.
>>
>>By now everyone knows what that means! But all the other posts would be laid out in their original order. Give us some credit for being able to carry on conversations even when someone drops (rather, is dropped) out. Your current policy (Homer’s been a bad boy, so we’re going to have to spank you all) is, of course, unfair. I put some thought into what I say and write. I don’t violate your policies. It is annoying in the extreme to find that I’ve wasted my time and my words are gone.
>>
>>So, how about adopting this change?
>>
>>-Joan
>>
>>
>>

On the surface that may seem like a nice idea, but in reality it is not. If the content of that person's message was edited by someone with the high enough proper authority and they replaced that message with a 'boiler plate' message as you so nicely put it then we lose the tangible proof or evidence that their post was ever in violation to being with - it has in effect been wiped out. This will open up a whole ballfield of potential abuse/complaints from users that 'the mod is unfairly editing my posts and they hate me and I really wasn't breaking the rules and...' On the old forums the only option we had was to delete/wipe out the posts..once the post was gone it was gone for good. With the new forums we simply hide them and keep the information intact..if someone chooses to appeal the removal of their post from the forums and the site coordinator rules in favor of them and declares the post having been hidden in error by a moderator, then we have the ability to reinstate that post. Hiding the posts keeps the messages intact so that they can be referred back to at a later date should someone decide to make the attempt to appeal to the site coordinator about the status of their posts and/or account. We need to keep the chain of evidence intact so that those higher up the chain of command can review/check up on to make sure that our moderators are not abuseing the system or their responsibility.

The majority of the time when the main post of a thread is removed it is quite apparent it is in violation of the rules so it should fall upon the shoulders of the users of the site to resist the urge to continue the violation by responding to it. It is very easy for others to cross the line and actually find their accounts in jeopardy because they started directly violating the rules with the content of their messages in response to someone else who was violating the rules and then complain...'but he started it why am I getting in trouble too'. Flame wars/bashing fests are prime examples of this.

I will admit that in this particular case, the main post in the thread in question was not obvious to the general population as having been in violation of the rules but it was and it had to be removed. If anyone wishes to continue the general theme/topic of that conversation going on within the thread they may feel free to start up a new thread. If you in particular would like a copy of your own post that was removed when the entire discussion was pulled so that you can repost it as a new thread, then I would be happy to oblige....just contact me.

_____

Wyvern

>On the surface that may seem like a nice idea, but in reality it is not.

Ouch!!!!! What a harsh thing to say!

I don't really know what the big deal is, and I don't really care. If the KS people tell me I can't do this or that on their site, FINE WITH ME!! After all, it's THEIR SITE! However, I hope that if I try to make a constructive recommendation on how they could improve, they will reply in a little bit nicer way