Censorship without explanation is tyranny

[Pattylallacks2]

No doubt you will remove this as well. Nicola Sturgeon could do with some tips from you.

[CAMiller]

No doubt you will remove this as well. Nicola Sturgeon could do with some tips from you.

I have no idea why it was removed as it wasn't me but I believe it was removed at the request of the poster. Is that explanation OK?

PS I also always tend to either merge, close or remove threads about threads because they are pointless.

[Pattylallacks2]

It might have been if that response had been given straight away. What would have been even better is the person who posted it having the guts to say "oops, made a mistake".

[CAMiller]

It might have been if that response had been given straight away. What would have been even better is the person who posted it having the guts to say "oops, made a mistake".

You asked if it had been redacted and I answered yes because it had.

[Pattylallacks2]

I have no idea why it was removed as it wasn't me but I believe it was removed at the request of the poster. Is that explanation OK?

PS I also always tend to either merge, close or remove threads about threads because they are pointless.

I wouldn't have been necessary to post a thread about another thread if the original thread hadn't been removed without explanation.

[CAMiller]

Again you asked if it had been redacted and I answered yes. BTW It's not censorship if the removal is driven by the author and not by the authoritarian. There was a thread on here earlier this week about someone passing away and that was eventually removed at the request of posters, not as a result of censorship.

[ragingpup]

Brin, why did you post that?? I celebrated almost as hard as the winner last night!

[Pattylallacks2]

The two cases are entirely different, The first required no explanation, not only because several members openly asked for it to be removed, but also because it could clearly cause great distress to the family of the man involved.

The second could have caused distress to no-one but the person who posted it in error. The fact that he then approached a moderator to ask for it's removal rather than just hold his hands up and apologise smacks of the old boys network.

[ragingpup]

To be fair, if Brin received wrong information and upon realising that asked to have the post removed so as idiots like me don't read the title and run around like they've won the world cup, then it makes sense for it to be withdrawn at his request.

If he did it as a joke, and then realised it was ****ed up, then I'm gonna beat him u p good and propa

[CAMiller]

The two cases are entirely different, The first required no explanation, not only because several members openly asked for it to be removed, but also because it could clearly cause great distress to the family of the man involved.

The second could have caused distress to no-one but the person who posted it in error. The fact that he then approached a moderator to ask for it's removal rather than just hold his hands up and apologise smacks of the old boys network.

As I don't know the answer to why it was posted/removed I won't attempt to give one, I just saw that it had been so answered in the affirmative to your original question.

Many posters put things on here and then go back and delete their own post in the time you get to be able to do that. However, I can still see what it was they deleted. Do you suggest I should 'un delete' those because they shouldn't be allowed to censor themselves? I'm guessing in this case the original poster may have made a mistake and been too late to delete it themselves. There's certainly no OB network at play.