| |
|
I see your point Haus, sounds fair enough. Interesting though, not sure that just because you start a thread you should be able to have it deleted.
Yeah - I largely agree, which is why I vetoed the move to delete. Locking is more reversible and less impactful, so that one I thought was a reasonabble request. If the thread had been an uncontroversial discussion of Kropotkinism, say, I would not have respected a wish to have it locked by the thread starter, but I think in some cases (and the low stakes of the Convo helps this) it's fair to respect somebody not wanting what is happening at the far end of their thread to be done in their name. You get to respect people's indiviudal feelings more in the Convo, I think. For example, Lord Morgue posted a rant in the Head Shop about how much he hated poor people, and then by the time he woke up and thought better of it it had become a part of the discussion, which made the decision of whether to delete it on the grounds that the person who had created it in the first place wanted it gone against the right other people had to understand the context of the discussion. On a basic level, people don't own their threads or their posts - which is reflected in the need for moderator approval. On t'other hand, they do own their posts more than they own other people's, which is reflected in the ability to make mod requests even in fora one does not moderate. It's a balance... |
|
|
