Happy Thanksgiving! Moderator Question?

[Bryant Park]

Is the sharing of negative experiences with ADs now a prohibited area of discussion? I was also wondering if "controversial" threads were now subject to removal in there entirety, and if so what is the criteria for removal?

I just want to understand the rules to decide how and if I should participate. I fully respect that it is the moderators forum and your rules to establish and enforce. That said given the volume of PMs I have gotten I know that I am not alone in my current state of confusion.

Thank you and once again Happy Thanksgiving all!

Lastly, I would hope that an honest query won't get my banned as I truly enjoy the forum.

[Bryant Park]

Is there a response to the question beyond moving this please?

[Chiboy]

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

Is there a response to the question beyond moving this please?

“Welcome to Siberia!”

[Bryant Park]

Originally Posted by Chiboy

“Welcome to Siberia!”

Ha ha... Apparently there is a middle ground between approved and banned

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

Is there a response to the question beyond moving this please?

Sure... I don't have any idea what you are talking about..

I'm pretty sure though, that we get more complaints and reports about threads and posts before we close or delete them than your "volume of pm's" about Forum management.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

Is the sharing of negative experiences with ADs now a prohibited area of discussion? I was also wondering if "controversial" threads were now subject to removal in there entirety, and if so what is the criteria for removal?

I just want to understand the rules to decide how and if I should participate. I fully respect that it is the moderators forum and your rules to establish and enforce. That said given the volume of PMs I have gotten I know that I am not alone in my current state of confusion.

Thank you and once again Happy Thanksgiving all!

Lastly, I would hope that an honest query won't get my banned as I truly enjoy the forum.

Happy thanksgiving but like Larry have no idea what you are talking about.

[Chiboy]

Originally Posted by padi56

Happy thanksgiving but like Larry have no idea what you are talking about.

I think no one here understands what this refers to because the thread was moved from the Patek forum, where the issue came up, to this forum.

[Rockrolex]

Originally Posted by Chiboy

I think no one here understands what this refers to because the thread was moved from the Patek forum, where the issue came up, to this forum.

I still don't understand the query. Does it relate only to Patek or to all brands?

[Chiboy]

Originally Posted by Rockrolex

I still don't understand the query. Does it relate only to Patek or to all brands?

It relates to all brands but refers to a 28 page thread about Govberg's selling practices that was somewhat unceremoniously deleted. I can't speak for the OP of this thread but have the strong sense that a lot of folks who read or took part in that thread felt that the thread was deleted from the archives because it reflected poorly on the selling practices employed by at least some people at an AD that has some relationship with this forum's owner(s).

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by Chiboy

It relates to all brands but refers to a 28 page thread about Govberg's selling practices that was somewhat unceremoniously deleted. I can't speak for the OP of this thread but have the strong sense that a lot of folks who read or took part in that thread felt that the thread was deleted from the archives because it reflected poorly on the selling practices employed by at least some people at an AD that has some relationship with this forum's owner(s).

Was this the AD where the OP went in 10 years later to show his watch?

[Chiboy]

Originally Posted by MonBK

Was this the AD where the OP went in 10 years later to show his watch?

Ha, no. I don't want to recreate the thread but the gist of it is someone was "on the list" to get a limited edition PP. They were continually told they would get it, and then at the last minute, they were told they had to buy something like $22k - $30k of jewelry in order to be "eligible" to buy the watch. My apologies if I am misstating the general theme of the thread, but that is my best impartial recollection of it. While the merits of having these rules, or changing these rules at the last minute are debatable, a lot of forum members, myself included, wondered why the entire discussion was deleted from the archives rather than just closing the thread if moderators/owners felt some comments "crossed the line." In addition, a number of long time members were banned for reasons unknown. This is all I will say about this, as I don't currently wish to be banned, and other than on moral grounds, I have no dog in this fight.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Chiboy

. . the strong sense that a lot of folks who read or took part in that thread felt that the thread was deleted from the archives because it reflected poorly on the selling practices employed by at least some people at an AD that has some relationship with this forum's owner(s).

While the merits of having these rules, or changing these rules at the last minute are debatable, a lot of forum members, myself included, wondered why the entire discussion was deleted from the archives rather than just closing the thread if moderators/owners felt some comments "crossed the line." In addition, a number of long time members were banned for reasons unknown. This is all I will say about this, as I don't currently wish to be banned, and other than on moral grounds, I have no dog in this fight.

Perhaps it's asinine statements and assumptions such as this being pushed that resulted in closures, bans, and deletions, as well as further assumptions that the OP's position was the only side of the issue.

[dchang81]

money talks i guess

[Welshwatchman]

Originally Posted by dchang81

money talks i guess

You'd guess wrong there, captain profound.

The site owner is a barrister in law. He is aware of what can give him grief legally but he also has his personal preferences for what amounts to fair play.

He sets the ultimate tone for the forum.

Methinks it's the folk who go just a little bit beyond the pale who push these threads into the bin.

[Bryant Park]

I recognize this appears to be emotionally charged but please take the OP for what it is, a question as to the rules. Under what circumstance can and will a thread be deleated and what is the criteria?

While a specific thread deletion in the Patek forum was the catalyst for the question, the motivation is to understand the forums rules, abide by them, and then decide on a personal level of participation.

Clearly given the tone of the conversation on all sides, the bannings and the responses, some ambiguity exists. I am not sure why looking for clarity is being treated as an act of aggression?

While the owner sets the tone we are all in a forum framework contributors, consumers, and customers as all content and value only exists by virtue of mutual respect and participation.
I am trying to take a higher road and help find some agreement but fear I will be labeled as asinine, banned, or worse expunged from the collective memory of what is supposed to be a public discourse.

Thanks

[77T]

The paradox of clarity and ambiguity has puzzled humans for eons.

Ergo, IMHO, there will be no one-size-fit-all answer in the world of differing contexts.

An answer that works well in one context may not work in another. Thus in the the forum, some ambiguity is a norm, and gives the moderators the latitude to keep this the best, and most civil, forum I’ve seen in many years.

Of course the rules do outline subjects that are strictly off-limits.


Sent from my iPhoneX using Tapatalk

[Bryant Park]

Originally Posted by 77T

The paradox of clarity and ambiguity has puzzled humans for eons.

Ergo, IMHO, there will be no one-size-fit-all answer in the world of differing contexts.

An answer that works well in one context may not work in another. Thus in the the forum, some ambiguity is a norm, and gives the moderators the latitude to keep this the best, and most civil, forum I’ve seen in many years.

Of course the rules do outline subjects that are strictly off-limits.


Sent from my iPhoneX using Tapatalk

Absolutely fair response. Stated differently, yes threads can be deleted based on the sole subjective views of the moderators. I wil go forward participating based on that being the case.

Thank you.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

Absolutely fair response. Stated differently, yes threads can be deleted based on the sole subjective views of the moderators. I wil go forward participating based on that being the case.

Thank you.

They are seldom "sole subjective views", although in some instances it is clear that a post or thread, or member, needs to be moved off the main boards immediately for further administrative discussion.

A thread may also be removed to await further clarification from an OP, or a third party that is being disparaged may be contacted for clarification since our experience has shown that a single narrative is frequently biased to elicit a preferred response.

Posts, threads, and members are frequently discussed at length within admin channels to ensure that a final decision is in the best interest of the Forum. Decisions may not always be unanimous amongst the Admin Team

[Bryant Park]

Originally Posted by Tools

They are seldom "sole subjective views", although in some instances it is clear that a post or thread, or member, needs to be moved off the main boards immediately for further administrative discussion.

A thread may also be removed to await further clarification from an OP, or a third party that is being disparaged may be contacted for clarification since our experience has shown that a single narrative is frequently biased to elicit a preferred response.

Posts, threads, and members are frequently discussed at length within admin channels to ensure that a final decision is in the best interest of the Forum. Decisions may not always be unanimous amongst the Admin Team

Thank you for clarifying.