Why have numerous relevant threads been moved to discussion time?

coolcait

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

I don't respect people I don't know. I am polite and open-minded instead.

I don't think the comments made to Divadee were all justified. I do think she acted pretty unreasonably herself, and then failed to realise it.

I agree with the part I have put in bold.

I disagree with the part that I have put in italics.

But, at least, you are possibly unique among the 'regular posters' on House Prices in being able to make the distinction between the two.

neverdespairgirl

And continued here owing to excessive length before:

4. A thread entitled "Newsnight: Quantitative Easing"

Apparently, the means by which people get the money to pay for houses is not relevant to the board. I completely disagree.

5. This one is called "A view from the people working in the City"

The thread kicks off with:

It seems that, as the baby boomers hit retirement age, two generations are having to learn that the reckless credit-fuelled booms of the last two decades were the anomaly. Their totems are still-unaffordable house prices, record consumer debt and a population unprepared for recession.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1301391

6. Then there is " 400,000 construction workers to lose jobs"

Which seems fairly house-price-related to me. Those 400,000 people build the things.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1303019

7. And this thread, "Inflation - can someone explain it in simple terms?"

In this thread, the poster asked about inflation, in relation to two flats and their prices. And got lots of detailed, factual replies. Clearly relevant to the board.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1333967

8. The thread asking how long people think the recession will last.

Relevant to house prices? People replying thought so:

Interest rates are becoming increasingly irrelevant as far as HPC goes, it's good news if you have a mortgage but these people already have a house. For the market to recover they need new blood in at the bottom, the banks will further restrict lending criteria to new borrowers as they have very little money to lend and the bit they do have is for current mortgage holders who are giving them less and less return as the rates drop.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1334305

9. This thread, with the OP asking if he is the only one feeling a certain way, and saying:

Well dunno about you, but I`m getting really quite scared of what is going on. We have lent squillions to the banks, doesn`t seem to be doing a lot of good. Woolies and MFI going under. Ftse all over the place. Houses nose diving. Now they are talking about interest rates possibly down to 1%.

and got replies such as:

I was a bit scared but today I nearly buckled and bought a house

and

If you take a few of your point,s interest rates, house prices (falling is good!! we've been brain washed to think its bad!) and tax give aways is nothing different to whats happening in the states and theyve been in it for longer so nothing doing there.

not to mention:

Last weekend ...a friend.. 'Next doors house sold for 140k last year so ours should be worth more than that' . My husband practically put his hand over my mouth before I started, but I just agreed....what self control

and also including:

I'm glad we sold our house, but I don't see the point in rubbing it in the faces of recent buyers. There was a palpable air of worry, whenever house prices were mentioned. I can't imagine what it must be like to watch the economy go down the toilet while you are loaded up with debt on a depreciating asset. Especially if that asset is a home which isn't suitable long-term.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1318711

10. And the chap who started a thead asking why a recession was bad, and his first sentence was:

if house prices are going to fall by 50% in real terms, and unemployment doubles from around 5% to 10%, that only means there is a 1 in 20 chance of me being affected. i think i will take my chances.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1308375

coolcait

huntersc wrote: »

That would have been an entirely sensible approach. No doubt many would have taken the time to think about what was being posted. A few PMs might also have gone down well.

Riding roughshod over the forum and those that post here helping people every day and just binning and moving a ton of threads was obviously not a sensible approach. Especially as some of the threads could easily have been considered 'on topic'.

Far from being blameless the mod really ought to look at herself and perhaps evaluate where she might have made better decisions. Again, not a personal attack, no humiliation intended, I'm just making the point, as you have done, that there might have been a more sensible approach which could have had an altogether different result.

I really do think the mod made a very big mistake. I feel sorry for her because I do think she intended to do the right thing, I just worry that she didn't see the rather obvious consequence.

Imagine if any mod went to any other board and moved 20 posts and closed 20 threads without any major explanation or discussion. Wouldn't one imagine that there might be a little bit of an uproar? It seems very obvious to me....

I'm afraid we seem to be talking about different things. My reference to the 'OP' was to the OP on this thread. How would the discussion have panned out if the OP had been appealing to fellow board members (in terms of their propensity to post off-topic) rather than to the BG? That said, I would see it as an entirely sensible approach. What are your views?

I completely disagree with your second paragraph.

I completely disagree with your third paragraph - only in part because it is based on a misunderstanding of my earlier post.

I completely disagree with your fourth paragraph - and am still disturbed by the fact that you are, IMO, kicking the BG under the pretence that you really sympathise with her.

Your fifth paragraph is rather hyperbolic. I had also understood that it was threads that were moved from the House Prices board, rather than posts; and I have seen no references to threads being closed. The House Prices board is not the only one to have seen several threads moved in one day. It seems like a fairly regular occurrence if you are posting on more than one board.

Harriett

dervish wrote: »

All those people who have joined in this thread to post POINTLESS, PUERILE, IRRELEVANT rubbish then please go away.

This thread is a serious comment and discussion of a very upsetting and controversial editorial decision that was made this morning.

Only please post relevant comments please.

Too many stupid, crass supposedly fiunny comments have been made and they stink!

If you are not involved then butt out...

This forum is open for all to post.
You have no right to dictate to anyone where they can post.

Others have had similar problems in other parts of the moneysaving forum yet have not descended to this level of abuse that we have seen in this thread. It gets dealt with when the team are online.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, so telling them to butt out won't get you anywhere it will just antagonise and cause more friction.

MSE Abuse make the rules, and we have to follow them, as do the board guides, whether we agree with them or not. It is Martin Lewis' site, his rules, if you don't like it, either email mse abuse, discuss topics politely and then you may earn respect, or find a more appropriate war zone on another forum for your temperament.;)

Basically, if you all wanted to air your views, a polite thread would have been more well considered and your request to have threads moved back may have been given some consideration, whereas now, I would imagine hell would freeze over first because of the abusive nature of so many posts. :rolleyes:

coolcait

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

1. Entitled "Shocker Alert - The crash is worse than I thought!"

It's about buy-to-let arrears, repossessions, and tenancies. Pretty clearly relevant, it seems to me.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1339241

2. Entitled "A great Article to show why Clown is a dunce"

About current issues regarding lending, borrowing, mortgage rates, house prices, and repossessions. For example, the linked article says:

Perhaps in an effort to distract attention from what the state-owned lenders are doing, on Wednesday Brown rushed out a quarter-baked plan to allow some borrowers to drop their mortgage repayments for up to two years without forfeiting their homes. The prime minister declared, using his favourite term: “Hard-working households that experiencea redundancy . . . will be able to defer a proportion of their interest payments”. Only “hard-working” households, please note, though how many households that are experiencing redundancy could simultaneously be described as “hard-working” is a riddle to which only Brown knows the answer. Margaret Beckett, the housing minister, bravely guessed that the answer might be about 9,000. Somehow I don’t think that qualifies the prime minister to state, as he did, that this “will help homeowners to feel more secure”.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1339471

3. Thread entitled "Just got back from Las Vegas"

This is about current economic issues in America, granted.

But it includes reference to the housing market in America, for example:

In a cheap motel in California I went to get the complimentary breakfast and naturally picked up a property directory magazine that was on the racks ( similar to property mags given out here at supermarkets)for a flick. There were pages of homes, mobile homes, ranches etc. Most said bank owned. on the bottom of the pages it said "100% finance available, no deposit down"

So entirely on-topic, unless you think that "house prices" is a purely UK issue.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1337393

3. Thread entitled "Britain set to turn into Japan"

This thread was about house prices, and clearly understood by many posters to refer to the endless slump in Japanese house prices whcih started in the 1990s. For example, that thread includes the comments, from different posters:

Firstly:

Banks are being forced to lower interest rates, and even not reposses for up to 2 years.

Also prices dropped 80% in Japan everyone agrees we are looking at about 50% average drops here in Blighty.

Secondly:

Things aren't quite that bad here yet but the banks are clearly more risk-averse than they have been for many years. The best deals on the market require deposits of 40 or 50% and anyone with a remotely iffy credit rating hasn't a chance of getting even the worst deals.

So the point stands: if you can't get a loan, what difference does it make that base rates are the lowest they have been since the 1950s? We endlessly hear, not least from Gordon Brown, about how there is massive "pent-up demand" for property in the UK. But this isn't a concept that makes any sense in economic terms: demand isn't demand unless it is backed by cash.

Thirdly:

yes we will be like Japan as long as everyone agrees that if their house is over 5 years old its now worthless and they don't want to live in it and they now want to live in a new house

so everyone for a new home then?

Fourthly:

One major difference between Japan and the UK is that the country suffers from regular earthquakes.

I understand this means that older property is not regarded so well and basically there is a need to build new houses all the time.

The market is not geared to having a home for 60-80 years and then still be able to sell on.

Fifthly:

I think Really wrote that they had 100 year mortgages because of the extreme prices, frightening if the houses did not stay up that long

Sixthly:

House prices have dropped massively - rents have too apparently.

So you already get more for your money. Since this is the biggest purchase most of us are likely to make that's great deflationary news.

Seventhly:

Also funny how quickly we move from property prices are booming to property prices are crashing.

Eightly:

House prices would not have been ramped up and the banks would not now be knackered. But would the government still be in power had there not been a 'boom' in the last few years? If not, what does that say about our democracy?

Of course there is other economic stuff in that thread as well - inevitably.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1337837

I haven't read the one about 'Just got back from Las Vegas' as it was not obviously about House Prices (bear in mind that's all I have to go on when looking for the moved threads, as I am not a 'regular' on the board). I will do so tonight if poss - as soon as anyway.

I've already given my views on the 'Shocker Alert' thread. To sum up - the OP could be seen as relevant; not all of the thread content fit the bill.

Same for the 'Japan' thread.

The article about current issues re lending, borrowing, mortgage rates etc is the only example I have seen so far where the content could be seen as relevant. If it hadn't been for this thread, I wouldn't even have read it,as it has been buried under the title. An example of the way that people's person political views can obscure the information they want to share?

meester

I just created several threads about house prices but they have all been locked.

coolcait

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

I've never come across her before, that I remember (although, of course, I may well have done and forgotten).

So all I know about her is that she stormed on the house prices board today, and removed an awful lot of interesting stuff about economic issues, and some rubbish as well (Brown and Zimbabwe, for example). So it appears to me that she doesn't know how the board works at all.

Ouch! to your first sentence. I hadn't thought you were capable of such deliberate cruelty, NDG. Mea culpa.

'Stormed' is your word. I disagree with it in the context you are using it, but believe it applies to others, and other posts,in the past 24 hours.

How much of the 'interesting economic stuff' had already been buried by off-topic stuff - if you read the threads?

You acknowledge she removed some rubbish. We have a point of agreement. :T

neverdespairgirl

coolcait wrote: »

However, in terms of principles, divadee has followed the guidance given to her by line managers.


It seems to me that the role of a BG is far from easy or clearcut. What do you think?

I don't think that she has followed the guidance, though.

A quick look found this:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=103395

which says: "This section expands on what the Board Guides have been asked to do."



Firstly, it appears that part of the role is:


Generally the person picked would be someone that has used that particular board a lot and already understands how it works. An enthusiasm for keeping that board running smoothly and helping newbies find the information they need quickly and easily is the key.

And that doesn't apply to Divadee. Before yesterday, she'd made 5 posts on the board, ever. One in April 2008, 3 in May, 1 in June. That is out of 8,548 ever, so she's made 0.05% of her posts on that board.

The guidance goes on to say:

Threads should be moved if they’re obviously disturbing the flow of the board and/or are not likely to get a big response where they are.

In fact, the posts were getting big responses where they were. And moving 30 - 40 posts in one go caused far, far more distrubance to the board than the posts themselves had done. The posts en masse were not "obviously" disturbing the board.

Plus, she went on to a completely unrelated board, and an utterly different topic (competitions!) to post about this, and whip up support. Seems fairly unprofessinal to me, and clearly entirely off-topic in relation to competitions! She said:

i just need to come in here and SSSSSSSSCCCCCCCCCCRRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAMMM MMMMMMMMM

There are then 25 posts in a row (count 'em!) about bottles of wine, dodgy cats, Christmas trees, and sticks (nothing to do with competitions, of course).

Then someone weighed in on the thread, stating:

Quite agree Toniq. Can't understand the small mindedness of them wanting their own discussion time threads in their sub-forum, but that's still no excuse for their rudeness & spiteful comments.

Any compers want to show their support for Divadee by voting "No" in the poll on this thread:-

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...html?t=1339489

And instead of saying "no, that will fan the flames" the response from Divadee is:

aaww you guys have reduced me to tears now. i am honestly crying now.

to be honest if it wasnt for the comps board i would of given it up bynow, the hassle and carp you get sometimes make you realise its not worth it.

Did it work, by adding to the chaos? Yes, the very next poster said:

Divadee, i'm just off to read the thread cos I hadn't seen it. You know we all love ya and think your fab and do a great job though.

Then you get several posters (about 10 or so), who've never been on the house prices board before, voting "no" in the poll to "support" her.

And more stiring:

Here's the link again for NOs

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...html?t=1339489

Then you get 20-odd posts about the entirely off-topic Irish pork issue (related to competitions how, exactly?) And then 40-odd posts about sick children, the house prices board, etc. So that's pages of that thread off-topic. But not, strangely, moved to the Discussion Board.

All on this thread:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1315903

neverdespairgirl

coolcait wrote: »

Ouch! to your first sentence. I hadn't thought you were capable of such deliberate cruelty, NDG. Mea culpa.

'Stormed' is your word. I disagree with it in the context you are using it, but believe it applies to others, and other posts,in the past 24 hours.

How much of the 'interesting economic stuff' had already been buried by off-topic stuff - if you read the threads?

You acknowledge she removed some rubbish. We have a point of agreement. :T

It's no dig at all. I dare say there are loads of posters whose names I don't recongise, but have actually interacted with before. It's inevitable on a big site with so many users!

Very little interesting stuff had been buried, in my opinion.

coolcait

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

And continued here owing to excessive length before:

4. A thread entitled "Newsnight: Quantitative Easing"

Apparently, the means by which people get the money to pay for houses is not relevant to the board. I completely disagree.

5. This one is called "A view from the people working in the City"

The thread kicks off with:

It seems that, as the baby boomers hit retirement age, two generations are having to learn that the reckless credit-fuelled booms of the last two decades were the anomaly. Their totems are still-unaffordable house prices, record consumer debt and a population unprepared for recession.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1301391

6. Then there is " 400,000 construction workers to lose jobs"

Which seems fairly house-price-related to me. Those 400,000 people build the things.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1303019

7. And this thread, "Inflation - can someone explain it in simple terms?"

In this thread, the poster asked about inflation, in relation to two flats and their prices. And got lots of detailed, factual replies. Clearly relevant to the board.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1333967

8. The thread asking how long people think the recession will last.

Relevant to house prices? People replying thought so:

Interest rates are becoming increasingly irrelevant as far as HPC goes, it's good news if you have a mortgage but these people already have a house. For the market to recover they need new blood in at the bottom, the banks will further restrict lending criteria to new borrowers as they have very little money to lend and the bit they do have is for current mortgage holders who are giving them less and less return as the rates drop.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1334305

9. This thread, with the OP asking if he is the only one feeling a certain way, and saying:

Well dunno about you, but I`m getting really quite scared of what is going on. We have lent squillions to the banks, doesn`t seem to be doing a lot of good. Woolies and MFI going under. Ftse all over the place. Houses nose diving. Now they are talking about interest rates possibly down to 1%.

and got replies such as:

I was a bit scared but today I nearly buckled and bought a house

and

If you take a few of your point,s interest rates, house prices (falling is good!! we've been brain washed to think its bad!) and tax give aways is nothing different to whats happening in the states and theyve been in it for longer so nothing doing there.

not to mention:

Last weekend ...a friend.. 'Next doors house sold for 140k last year so ours should be worth more than that' . My husband practically put his hand over my mouth before I started, but I just agreed....what self control

and also including:

I'm glad we sold our house, but I don't see the point in rubbing it in the faces of recent buyers. There was a palpable air of worry, whenever house prices were mentioned. I can't imagine what it must be like to watch the economy go down the toilet while you are loaded up with debt on a depreciating asset. Especially if that asset is a home which isn't suitable long-term.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1318711

10. And the chap who started a thead asking why a recession was bad, and his first sentence was:

if house prices are going to fall by 50% in real terms, and unemployment doubles from around 5% to 10%, that only means there is a 1 in 20 chance of me being affected. i think i will take my chances.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1308375

I will have to return to this tomorrow, as I simply can't read all the posts on the thread tonight.

Which I think is the key point. The content of the OP doesn't always mean that the whole thread is about that. Some posts may be, but others are completely off topic - sometimes the majority.

When that happens, then off course the thread is at risk of being moved. But why blame the person who moves it, rather than the posters who have contributed to it going off topic?