How and why does stuff get deleted?

3/31/2007 4:48:00 PM

At the risk of getting banned a 3rd time, I have to ask the question. Who makes the decision to delete reviews or other posts on TUSCL.? I know that the posts by Bones were by his request and I know why. And I thank founder for giving him what he needed.

Recently there was a controversial review deleted. By who's request or authority? The poster?, The club management or the TUSCL editors?

Where is the accountability? Or does there have to be any on a private site? I guess that founder can do what ever he wants with this site. It's his. And I doun't hold a grudge about that.

What killed shadowcat was my demand for answers from founder about deleted material. "I don't know, was not a good enough answer for me" .We Fought. I lost.I lost my identity. I lost my membership into 2011. Where I was rated in the top 5 with the amount of reviews, I now have 2 and have lost interest in increasing that.

Founder posted his topic about the history of TUSCL. That brought back bad memories about the only guy to get banned from TUSCL. I had to blow my stack again. Even though I knew it would get Igiveup banned. It did. I was banned again.

This banning only lasted 3 days. I was surprised as the message he sent ment me was permanent. I am not sure why he lifted the ban. I thought that Bones may have been a player. He denies it.

Founder, I love your site and want to contribute as much as I can but you have to understand that you have to be honest with us and treat us like you would like a stripper to treat you....

7 comments

Latest

founder

•

18 years ago

I will give this one shot, and one shot only.

The review that I think you're referring to was not controversial. It was obviously a joke review. It should have never been published. The review and the reviewer's account were deleted.

The new tuscl (soon to be released) will try to curb poor and false reviews.

parodyman-->

•

18 years ago

Hopefully the new TUSCL will keep posters like Funseeker and others with a poor command of the English Language from publishing reviews. It is embarassing to us all when they do.

DougS

•

18 years ago

Founder: again, let me say that I'm really looking forward to the new TUSCL. It's already a great site, and am anticipating how much better it might be.

Any chance that the new site will actually make use of a "form" to fill out, when posting a review, so that the reviews are more "standardized", and also reinforce to the user what should be included in a good review?

chandler

•

18 years ago

Here's a vote for leaving the reviewing and rating pretty much as they are, unstructured and uncomplicated. I think that's by far TUSCL's greatest asset. Better screening of false reviews would be nice, but I'm skeptical about forcing people to write good reviews about things they don't care about. In my book, tastes-good trumps good-taste every time. Of course, this isn't my book.

Anyway, I hope most of the improvements are focused on website performance and streamlining of stuff like searching and mapping, and not getting carried away with fixing what ain't broke. I think Founder has shown pretty sound judgment so I'm not too worried.

shadowcat

•

18 years ago

chandler: I agree with you. I think what is needed is better trained editors. I once had a review rejected because the editor did not like part of the content. Founder said that it shouldn't have been rejected.

DougS

•

18 years ago

Who are these mysterious editors? How many are there? How does one become an editor? (seems like that could be an interesting chore)

chandler

•

18 years ago

I have "editors", too. Anytime I post a typo it's because they screwed up.

You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now

Got something to say?

Start your own discussion