>>1. I never raised any questions about Chief's deletions, don't know who he is or what board he posts on, so this is irrelevant.
It's very relevant. You are arguing that the rules in place and my lack of restoration of posts, though I disagree with the deletion is censorship. I'm showing you this happens and it works fine, without anybody kicking up a fuss. There are specific rules on some boards and the participants gladly follow them. In the case we are arguing, someone made a deletion, gave me a reason they felt valid, so I'm not arguing with it. Not to mention the fact it had a vulgarity in it.
>>2. Whether it is one deleted post or twenty is, or IMO should not be, the criteria for restoring posts. Posts are restored one at a time and need to be looked at individually.
They are.
>>3. You say the post was deleted because it was a "Personal Attack" in the opinion of the COB, yet:a. Mr. Ed did not object and ask that the post be deleted (as far as anyone knows)b. The COB did not, IN FACT, know whether a personal attack occurred; it was, and apparently still is, an assumption by the COB
An assumption by the COB on *their* board and no effort was made to correct this assumption by the person who made the post. If the poster felt he was violated, he should have taken the situation up directly with the Moderator (he took it up with me and I directed him to the Moderator after much fighting) and rectified the situation by explaining what the post meant.
>>4. I may be wrong, but I thought you represented yourself to be a "higher court", for just such a case when a post was unfairly deleted. If no personal attack occurred, then the deletion should not stand.
If it will make you guys happy, I'll ask the Moderator what he thinks of restoring the post, after I provide him with the details.
>>5. If you don't agree with the deletion, yet you won't restore the post, why are you part of the process?
Once again, I'm there to make sure things don't out of hand. If I see a bunch of deletions coming from one board, I figure out what's up. Maybe the guy is shouting down anybody that disagrees with him, in which case, I correct the situation (and I have). maybe he's altering his trading record. Lots of cases. In this case, nothing was out of hand, so I didn't get in the middle of it.
>>6. Perhaps you need to add another box to the board manager so that "other" and an explanation will be entered.
No, there are specific choices that they must fall into to delete.
>>7. And for you to say to me "If, in your opinion, this is censorship, then I suggest you stay off THAT board, as you views don't meet with theirs." is off base Matt. The issue isn't about MY post being censored.
If the way they run their board (over this one deleted post, that clearly might have been a mistake on their part, they were very emotionally tied up in this point they were trying to make) offends you, then I wouldn't post there. If I didn't like the way Zeev runs his board, I wouldn't post there.
>>8. Now, to sum up, by your post to me wherein you say: "I don't agree with the deletion. I got the joke and saw no problem with the post." why wouldn't you restore the admittedly incorrectly deleted post simply on principle?
Again, because I said I allow a certain amount of flex room for Moderators. This isn't a major issue (or wasn't), so I don't step in on their toes. I'd prefer to let them create or destroy THOSE boards. Some folks think I'm too overbearing and I delete too much. Some think I don't delete enough. It's a great rock to be in between.
Like I said above, if you'd like, I'll be happy to contact the Mod and explain the situation, as Churak *should* have done, and see what they think of restoring it.
MB
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
