I ask a genuine question and my thread is closed????

3v3

torbrex wrote: »

Just wait until you have been 'dealt with' by the abuse team, you will soon know the true meaning of that phrase. :rotfl:

Oooh, "dealth with" *Waiting*

3v3

ifonlyitwaseasier wrote: »

... if the BG's were to post on every closed thread a link to a new one they'd be overrun, especially as not all of them have new ones.

Yup, understand that; but, it transpires that there was indeed a 'new one' which could have been linked too; yet, it does still beg the question: if there is a popular, well subscribed thread, which many (who have a MS bent mentality) subscribe to - don't know if it was ever promoted as a thread of the week, I don't follow *that* closely - surely it makes common/good business/promotional sense to refer to another (if one exists!) thread of a similar context? (In this case, there was )

For example, a "further information can be located at .... " link?

StinkyNikki suggested there was one of a similar vein (as did Pink in her closing post on this new thread), but, that necessitated me posting to ask where that information may lie: had that link (posted by Stinky Nikki and thereafter Pink) been posted in the "closing" thread, there would have been no necessity for my post: equally, closing my thread would not have caused any negative attitude towards MSE!

And I still don't get the "not mentioning" aspect???? Who knows that? Your posts on this issue come across as quite .... defensive? ... like there are sub issues which only those "in the know" are privvy to? But, for most posters/visitors drawn from the emails, I would guess, they don't care too much about the sub-issues, only the predominant one: Closed threads and no indication of where to continue the discussion on (impersonal!) matters!!!!

Your argument is flawed simply because in *this* instance, it transpires there *is* an alternative thread of a similar context.

fuddle

I think frustrations are running high because a thread a lot of us like to read and interact with/lurk upon throughout the day has been closed.

It's a great shame that this has happened and not caused by the vast majority of the people who make the thread what it is.

The other thread is just not the same though. There's hardly any depth to the discussions and it's not for me. I'm waiting patiently hoping that the tougher thread will be reinstated and I worry that threads like this one and the other one will not help our case.

Could we just 'let sleeping dogs lie' in order to comply with what the board guides are suggesting, at the end of the day they're posters too and post on the tough threads along side us

Not wanting to annoy anyone at all. Sorry if I've offended you 3v3 but maybe for the good of the rest of us wanting the tough thread back, the easy going majority, let this go?

squeaky

Hi everyone

OK... where to start... I'm not going to answer every point, just cover the general situation here.

The thread which "went missing" was originally closed by me while waiting for the Forum Team to review it after a number of upsetting posts had been made. I made it clear that in order not to have the argument spilling over into other threads that I would close and report ANY thread that made reference to that earlier thread. That thread was deleted earlier today by the Forum Team and as yet I have had no indication from them that I can start a new version of it.

Even where a member may have in all innocence queried its location - it leaves the door open for any other members who wish to continue making their feelings known to step in and start the whole thing over again. Hence the reason for closing, so that no one can restart things.


There IS a similar thread - but it is aimed at a more light hearted approach and is not, and never has been intended to be, a replacement for the original thread on the subject.

Pink was quite right to close your original query and, had I been on line, I would have done so as well. I did not point you to the similarly named thread because they ARE different.

If you disagree with any of the actions that we have taken you are free to report us to the Forum Team. You can use the contact address in my signature, or the link at the top of every page of the forums.

HTH

3v3

squeaky wrote: »

...
Even where a member may have in all innocence queried its location - it leaves the door open for any other members who wish to continue making their feelings known to step in and start the whole thing over again. Hence the reason for closing, so that no one can restart things.
...
HTH

Yup, that does help - however, in my own defence, I did point out that I have no intentions of stirring the political pot (so to speak) merely to know .... where can I find this info!!!
(Not the contentious one; the INFORMATIVE one )

Closing posts with innocent enquiries really isn't conjusive to free discussion - even though, as you have now finally stated, it was to prevent a recurrance of previous tensions!

Tensions arise from the few that have time to invest in constant postings, daily attention to issues.

For those of us who are not in that remit - closures, censures and carte blance closure of threads does appear draconian in a free democracy; it does cause offense and it really isn't "user friendly".

I've taken on board your stance; who takes on board mine?

squeaky

3v3 wrote: »

I've taken on board your stance; who takes on board mine?

Here: [EMAIL="forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com"]forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL]

3v3

fuddle wrote: »

... Sorry if I've offended you 3v3 but maybe for the good of the rest of us wanting the tough thread back, the easy going majority, let this go?

You haven't "offended" me

I'm not involved in the politics which resulted in thread closures. Like you, and your "easy going majority", I would like the thread (or similar) reinstated.

I'm not trying to be a trouble maker - I just don't understand it all!!!!! And yes, maybe, having a thread I posted, CLOSED, does make me somewhat aggrieved: I don't understand it!

Maybe you're right, "letting go" for the good of the majority may seem sage advice and I do appreciate your reasoning behind that ethic.

I can't help feeling though, that my innocent, and genuine, query being met by such draconian measures of censureship .... is a bit too .... Hitler-esque!?

3v3

squeaky wrote: »

Here: [EMAIL="forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com"]forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL]

?????

That merely opens a pop-up in my browser that I do not subscribe to!???

What is the point you are making? (At this stage, it is a most UN-helpful point ... if, indeed, you have one?)

I have been polite to you, yet you link to something my security settings do not automatically allow? Is this some dodgy referral link? Or, is this an email link? I'm posting a query - why would I need to email anyone? Wow! This gets more user-UN-friendly by the posting!!! :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

(Psst! Have you worked in PR?? )

squeaky

That is the email address for the Forum Team.

It is the Forum Team that you need to talk to about the closure and deletion of the original thread, and about possibly opening a new version.

If you don't have email, let me know and I'll pass on your message for you.

fuddle

In my opinion, the way squeaky dealt with what was happening yesterday was entirely appropriate. The thread was attracting onlookers to post which was making things worse. There was absolutely no other way to deal with what happened and not one word has been said about it in over 24 hours, until now. All of us who post on that thread understand the reasoning behind why the thread was closed, the amount of 'thanks' the closing post squeaky made backs this up.

Not one of us have started a discussion on the other thread, a thread that has nothing to do with the ethos of the tougher thread, just by reading the first couple of pages of that thread any one can see what the point of that thread is. No-one has started another thread about it because we all know it is better to just let it all go, let 'tempers' calm down and let time heal.

I'm sorry you were confused. I'm sorry you lost your book mark, I'm sorry you feel the way this has been dealt with was a bit too heavy handed of an approach but it was an effective approach and needed in this instance.

Really, Old Style was never the place to ask a technical question or comment on board guides' procedures. I'm not surprised your thread was moved in all honesty.

I hope to see you on the tougher threads 3v3. Here's hope we get them reinstated