Why I Think Explanations Should Be GIven for Deleted Threads

[carnation]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

Tallulas' thread was locked because carnation didn't like being called out on having her daughter's invite round groups picked before rush even started. There are certain groups that carnation has deemed below her family's worth. And, just for clarity, this isn't an attack on carnation. If that's how she wants to run her family, she has every right to do so. Certain people just wish she didn't try to pretend otherwise.

Tallulah's thread was locked because of same-old same-old and AlphaFrog, you claimed to understand why I arranged it as I did. Instead, you're trying to start another pile-on and as you see, lovespink has readily accepted your word as the truth.

I am sick of the lies that have been spouted out over the last TEN years. Were any of you aware that some GCers went to my daughter's school in 2002 and physically tried to interfere in her rush? Were any of you aware that one of the same people went to another GCer's campus (no relation to me) and destroyed her rush? And that that person interfered in a third GCer's rush from home?

When I started Tallulah's thread, I tried to figure a way that I could have a theme and name the 4 groups she'll hopefully be returning to for first invitationals. We do hope she'll have 4 but she may not get 4. I am certainly not saying how many groups are at her school. But--people want to drink the "haterade", as they used to say, and believe that 4 groups were pre-selected as favorites.

Some of you are happily accepting what some push as the truth--that my family and I reject certain sororities as being below us. I would like you to prove that. Some of the people who are touting that as the truth weren't even on GC in 2002, they just believe what someone has told them was true. And it isn't. I have several friends on GC who are members of that group and they know that we respect that sorority.

Let me remind you all that personal attacks are a violation of the TOS. They can get deleted, they can get you banned. Remember that.

[lovespink88]

Calm down, carnation, "very interesting, thanks for the info" does not imply that I am accepting AlphaFrogs explanation as the be all end all truth. FWIW, you've always come off as unbiased to me. Other GCers may have different opinions, but that's their business. I tend to form mine on my own personal interactions.

Originally Posted by carnation

Let me remind you all that personal attacks are a violation of the TOS. They can get deleted, they can get you banned. Remember that.

Now, if we had a little more warnings like the one right here, this may have not have escalated like it has!

(not that I like to see that directed at a poster I like, but this is the kind of things that mods need to be doing before we start seeing mass deletions/locking)

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Kevin

The fact is that there is a very reasonable explanation. It's also a fact that the explanation is none of anyone's business.

I've seen what carnation wrote in this thead, and I thank her for posting it. I can see the frustration in it.

You're quite right that lots can be going on behind the scenes that the average CGer may not know about and probably doesn't need to know the details of. And I know as well as anyone that GC can have its drama, in-fighting and personality clashes. I remember some of the reports to HQs.

But here's the catch: Under those circumstances, it should be no surprise that average GCer, who doesn't know all the backstory, might raise an eyebrow at what happened in that thread. My point is that under those circumstance, I think it's in everyone's best interests, including the moderator's, to do something other than just lock or delete, even if it's just "We've been down this road before and we're not going again. Thread locked." That tells me, average GCer, that there's more to the story.

You say comment, I say harassment and bullying.

As I have said, what I have been asking about was the deletion of the original Wall of Shame thread. I don't recall anything there that rose to the level of harrassment or bullying. If there's backstory that the average GCer doesn't know (and doesn't need to know), I think the better practice is to lock the thread or delete the offending posts with a mod's note that the thread is veering into a repetition of harrassment or bullying. Then you avoid "What happened to that thread? What was wrong with it?"

Context is very important and you cannot just assume you have all of that context and it is not reasonable to assume you are entitled to an explanation.

Again, I've tried to be clear that I don't think anyone is entitled to an explanation. I actually think it does more harm than good to talk in those terms about this.

And of course we can't know all the context. But surely there is a middle ground between filling everyone in on all the backstory and saying nothing while those without context have the impression of arbitrariness.

I agree. In recent months, I can't say I have much nice to say about DSTChaos. I wouldn't let that enter into my decisions moderating her posts though.

I didn't mean to imply otherwise. I think I was trying to get more at that my focus in this discussion has been about what happened before all the drama started -- or at least when it seemed to me that the drama started. (And yes, I'd agree that this was DrPhil's swan song, at least for now. She knew what she was doing -- she saw an opportunity and used it.)

I really don't see the harm in keeping a list of banned posters unless that list is kept for the purpose of harassing moderators. Then it'll be deleted post haste. It would be awfully naive to think that the posting of that thread was unrelated to the goings on in the recruitment forum.

I guess this to me is why locking or deletions of posts rather than deletions of threads should be the way to go -- we're all talking about what we remember of the thread without having it to look at.

I feel like I've said all I can say on this, and I know I'm repeating myself. I think I've been heard, so I am going to fight really hard the urge to have the last word.

Y'all know how hard that is for me.

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by carnation

Tallulah's thread was locked because of same-old same-old and AlphaFrog, you claimed to understand why I arranged it as I did. Instead, you're trying to start another pile-on and as you see, lovespink has readily accepted your word as the truth.

I am sick of the lies that have been spouted out over the last TEN years. Were any of you aware that some GCers went to my daughter's school in 2002 and physically tried to interfere in her rush? Were any of you aware that one of the same people went to another GCer's campus (no relation to me) and destroyed her rush? And that that person interfered in a third GCer's rush from home?

When I started Tallulah's thread, I tried to figure a way that I could have a theme and name the 4 groups she'll hopefully be returning to for first invitationals. We do hope she'll have 4 but she may not get 4. I am certainly not saying how many groups are at her school. But--people want to drink the "haterade", as they used to say, and believe that 4 groups were pre-selected as favorites.

Some of you are happily accepting what some push as the truth--that my family and I reject certain sororities as being below us. I would like you to prove that. Some of the people who are touting that as the truth weren't even on GC in 2002, they just believe what someone has told them was true. And it isn't. I have several friends on GC who are members of that group and they know that we respect that sorority.

Let me remind you all that personal attacks are a violation of the TOS. They can get deleted, they can get you banned. Remember that.

I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt about your explanation of only listing four groups. Then you locked the thread, which made it pretty clear that you were backpeddling.

Once again, this isn't a personal attack. If you feel there are groups that are below your family, then it's fine. We're not blind enough to think the whole world can hold hands and sing kumbaya. Yes, GCers did get involved in one of your daughter's rushes, and many people here know why. It was an unfortunate circumstance.

[carnation]

Obviously, the thread was locked because someone decided to start nastiness with a snide remark. And it wasn't only a snide remark; she hoped to start the ten-year-old fight again.

Although she's not quite my age, she's far too old to start crap.

I'm not backpedaling and I love the names of my 4 groups.

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by carnation

Obviously, the thread was locked because someone decided to start nastiness with a snide remark. And it wasn't only a snide remark; she hoped to start the ten-year-old fight again.

Although she's not quite my age, she's far too old to start crap.

Oooooooohhhhhh please. If we closed every rush thread at the first snarky remark that forum would be nothing but a graveyard of locked threads.

And if we want to discuss personal attacks and acting like a ten year old, I'll bring you a mirror.

[carnation]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

Oooooooohhhhhh please. If we closed every rush thread at the first snarky remark that forum would be nothing but a graveyard of locked threads.

And if we want to discuss personal attacks and acting like a ten year old, I'll bring you a mirror.

Fine. Make sure you look in it first.

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by carnation

Fine. Make sure you look in it first.

Wow. Totally didn't see that one coming. Good show, old bird.

[shirley1929]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt about your explanation of only listing four groups. Then you locked the thread, which made it pretty clear that you were backpeddling.

Clear to whom? I would say that Carnation has the most Panhellenically-minded family of anyone on this forum.

I personally saw the locking as "I've got the groundwork for the story started & I don't want to hear a bunch of shizz from people until I can tell the whole story after the fact".

She explained her reasoning for listing 4 groups...why can't anyone take that at face value?

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by shirley1929

Clear to whom? I would say that Carnation has the most Panhellenically-minded family of anyone on this forum.

I personally saw the locking as "I've got the groundwork for the story started & I don't want to hear a bunch of shizz from people until I can tell the whole story after the fact".

She explained her reasoning for listing 4 groups...why can't anyone take that at face value?

Clear to those of us who know what some of us know.

And she knows better than to start a rush thread that early if she doesn't want chitchat in it. She's not new.

[carnation]

What you KNOW? Okay, prove it, AlphaFrog. you weren't there. I have witnesses who were. You pm me with every ounce of proof you have.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by carnation

What you KNOW? Okay, prove it, AlphaFrog. you weren't there. I have witnesses who were. You pm me with every ounce of proof you have.

I'd really super love it if you guys could take this to PM.

Originally Posted by Iota Man

Maybe she went too far, maybe she didn't. Neiter you or I know all the facts. If she didn't get a warning, she should have, whether you feel she needed one or not.

No, we don't know all the facts. But DrPhil did know that what she did (posting multiple iterations of the same thread with the same title, with pictures of people or things flipping the bird) was against the TOS. She was smart enough to know how to get banned. When you were banned a few times I'm not sure you knew why or whether or not what you did was against the TOS (I can't remember the circumstances anymore) - but DrPhil's was pretty clearly and intentionally against it.

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by carnation

What you KNOW? Okay, prove it, AlphaFrog. you weren't there. I have witnesses who were. You pm me with every ounce of proof you have.

I'm not BlueBatShit, I don't keep files of proof on people. I don't even really care, except inasmuch that you represent yourself as this mega-Panhellenic person. If you want to have biases, that's totally your prerogative as it applies to your and your families' lives. Just don't get your panties in a wad when someone calls you on it. Especially when you abuse mod powers in doing so. NO ONE ELSE'S thread would have gotten locked at that point.

[carnation]

Prove that I'm not Panhellenic. You claim that, you prove it.

[shirley1929]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt about your explanation of only listing four groups. Then you locked the thread, which made it pretty clear that you were backpeddling.

Once again, this isn't a personal attack. If you feel there are groups that are below your family, then it's fine. We're not blind enough to think the whole world can hold hands and sing kumbaya. Yes, GCers did get involved in one of your daughter's rushes, and many people here know why. It was an unfortunate circumstance.

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

Clear to those of us who know what some of us know.

Gee that's clear...

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

And she knows better than to start a rush thread that early if she doesn't want chitchat in it. She's not new.

I'm not new either, so I get what you're saying. But she has the power to lock it if she so chooses. Become a mod if you want the same power - don't be jealous or mean that she has the ability to if she wants...