NationStates Jolt Archive

Please delete this thread: http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=432014&page=1

Please delete this thread: http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=432014&page=1

why do you want to delete your own thread?

I'm pretty sure that the mods aren't going to delete/lock a thread in General unless there's some rulebreaking going on. I doubt they'll help you out unless you can give them some links and whatnot.

IIRC, the right that thread starters can have their threads deleted/locked is something only found in the role play forums.

Please delete this thread: http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=432014&page=1

Boom.

Anyone care to explain why the thread was deleted?

Also, is it standard policy to delete threads at the request of the OP?

IIRC, the right that thread starters can have their threads deleted/locked is something only found in the role play forums.

Generally, though it can be done in General at the mod's own discretion.

Boom.

Anyone care to explain why the thread was deleted?

Also, is it standard policy to delete threads at the request of the OP?
I requested that the thread be deleted because it became de facto flame-bait, though that was definitely not the purpose for which it was posted. I have no desire to be forum-banned again, or worse.

Also, is it standard policy to delete threads at the request of the OP?
Reposted from the One-Stop Rules Shop comments thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416022&page=2&pp=40)
So is it just common practice to respect thread ownership (to a degree) in General rather than a rule?
There are three different aspects here: thread management in a helpful sense, sticky management, and thread management in a rulebreaking sense.

It's common for us to lock, split, or otherwise maintain threads in General or other forums as a favor to the topic starter when such action will make the thread more readable or on topic. Examples of this include deleting or splitting posts from the General stickies that Erastide maintains or Komodom's UN sticky. Stickies are a somewhat special case, as their stickiness implies a certain level of Official Approval. If somebody has a non-sticky (but persistant) thread and wants similar assistance, we will consider it on a case by case basis. My base rule on that involves the question, "would I have done this if I stumbled across it myself?" If the answer is yes, I generally accede to the request.

Other General threads may be locked on request if the thread starter (or anyone else, for that matter) points out that the topic has devolved beyond redemption, or if rampant rulebreaking has wrecked the topic. From a maintenence perspective, this is just an extenstion of our own Modly ability to close problem threads and deal with topic hijacking. No one of us can possibly read every post in every thread, so it's fine to have them pointed out to us.

The thread ownership aspect in the RP forums extends much further than it does elsewhere. RP topic starters can ask to have certain players removed from a thread. We do not allow that level of control anywhere else. Also, requests for closure or deletion are almost entirely automatic, which is not the case elsewhere.

I'm not sure where these precedents came from (they preceded my modship), but that's how I read them, and that's how I observe them.

Reposted from the One-Stop Rules Shop comments thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416022&page=2&pp=40)

Thanks, I'd had a read through the One-Stop thread itself, but not the comments thread. However, that reposted block doesn't directly mention anything about deleting entire threads on the non-RP subforums.

We delete threads in all forums, all the time, both by request/suggestion and by stumbling across them. That would be the "otherwise maintain" part.

While the Rules sticky mentions infractions, it does not specify punishments. We use precedent, mod discussion, and our own judgement with rulebreaking threads on whether to lock, delete, or move to somewhere else. There didn't seem to be a need to get into specifics on this one.