I can't seem to find it. I don't want to jump to conclusions and I might have missed a post that was particularly objectionable, but I looked at it not all that long ago.

Good grief! Last I checked we were all adults here and the thread was not at all sexually explicit or otherwise offensive. People whose sensibilities cannot tolerate a thread on waxing of the bikini area can simply ignore it...can they not?

I'm sorry, but this sort of thing really yanks my chain. It makes me feel like the forum is full of 4th graders. That subject matter was so tame that it's almost unbelievable that it was yanked.

Here's an idea - if the subject line or the first post, for that matter, indicates subject matter that you aren't comfortable with....could you please just ignore the thread for the benefit of others that might find it interesting instead of complaining and getting it pulled when it's not breaking any of the guidelines? Or if it was just removed without complaint, I'd kind of like to know the reasoning behind it. Adults should be able to converse about such things on the "talk about life" page. It's not like we were speaking explicitly about sex. The very fact that it had several posts indicates that people here are interested about such things - can we not be the moderators of our own tastes?

This board is staid compared to another one where I post. They even have a forum devoted to sex and we discuss technique, experiences, toys, and write all the naughty words we want!

Nya, Nya, Nya, Nya, Nyaaaa!

Yanked?!?!

Well I hope the wax was hot.

I don't know when you read the thread last, Sharil. It had taken a turn to the slightly more graphic, in terms of the sexual bennies of shaving (nothing over-the-top though, AFAIK). I was finding it interesting reading, myself, but I read it with complete confidence that those posts, at the least, would be pulled.

Ridiculous, but not unexpected based on TOUs and past experience here.

I really don't understand why the mods can't yank the posts they felt crossed the line and leave the rest of the thread intact, though, since it had stood for multiple pages. Why not leave that part in place??

Agree. It hardly seems fair to the OP and subsequent posters who spent time contributing to a dialogue to have inoffensive posts yanked because others have crossed the line.

OK, so I might have missed something more graphic. Still, I'm so tired of threads falling to the most prudish denominator. Not all of us (no offense if you're into talking about any of these) want to only discuss gardening, grandkids and crocheting doilies. We are a diverse community and it just gets old when it feels like the censoring is done with a church sewing circle or covered wagon era schoolmarm mentality.

wow.
I posted something...which I thought was rather factual and pretty tame (nothing sexual, that's for sure)...and came back to see the thread was gone.
I'm sure hoping my post didn't kill the thread. :-(

Catie , I think you post was pretty safe , I think this is a clear case in which the offending posts should have been removed and thread left i. Too many grande scale thread poofs going on!

I agree about those threads, Nubs!

well it seems a certain area of life is according to POL still held to Victorian principles:

eyes closed and do it for queen and country.



anything else and what´s going on under the "unspeakables" is too shocking to keep!

Huh! I didn't contribute to that particular thread, but I read it and don't recall seeing anything objectionable. (Of course, something might have been posted that I didn't see before it was yanked).

So the TOS says: "Perfume, food and the arts are sensual and discussions may at times have light sexual connotations. Profanity, vulgarity and overt sexual conversation, references and images are not allowed."

Was something "overt" posted?

Actually yes, one post comes to mind , and believe me , I am no prude , however in light of those who have left us ( Bittergrace anyone?)or been banned due to less , it had to go , but not the entire thread!

I can think of a few posts that I thought crossed the line in the sand, but I realize that's open to interpretation.

But given that the thread was days old and hadn't offended, there's no justification for pulling the whole thing.

Well, I was probably one of those who "crossed the line in the sand". Should have known better. My apologies to the original poster, who didn't deserve to have the entire thread yanked. I won't be repeating such contributions.

Oh, I was enjoying the thread immensely myself. At least until the discussion veered towards men doing the same to their twig and berries. Then I wept silently to myself and curled up into a ball under the desk.

Thomas! Rofl! :P

I didn't contribute, but I didn't see anything offense in the thread, but I also hadn't read it for a couple days, so I must have missed a post or two.

Oops....offensive, I meant up there.

Darn, missed all the good stuff. I read the linked article early on.

QUOTE (magdalene @ Jan 13 2008, 11:24 AM)

Darn, missed all the good stuff. I read the linked article early on.

Same here!
Drat!

Do human beings actually have SEX and sexual thoughts???
(feigning shock and embarrassment)

Karen

I guess I was one of the guilty parties for getting the thread yanked. Gotta keep it clean!

Oh, wait a minute...that's what the thread was all about!

now I'm confused...

Teddius
(the ***** in ***** *****)

That's right, Teddius! I blame you! :-p

Maybe the thread, minus the graphic post(s), will be re-posted. One can hope. Really does seem silly and counterproductive to poof the entire thing.

This censorship is so constant and the voices of dissent always raised.

I must ask, WHO is actually in favour of such actions as whole threads being yanked? I realise this is not a democracy but I never read any comments explaining why or defending these over the top thread kills.

I had a feeling that thread would vanish as soon as it posted.

It must have been certain posts I certainly did not see - I posted on that thread and found it interesting, and I don't remember anything offensive being there the last time I looked, but it sounds like there were a number I never saw. What a pity, I really learned from the subject exactly what to expect and I appreciated the input.

Teacake, you raise an interesting point. It's never been clear to me either when threads are pulled whether a number of POL'ers have complained about the posts, or whether the mods do it of their own volition.

I would very much like to understand which it is.

In this particular case, did the mods decide that the thread exceeded the bounds of good taste and decorum, or did members specifically complain of being offended by this thread? If there were complaints, can you tell us how many? I mean, is one person offended, or dozens??

Without getting into the specifics of any particular thread, I can wholeheartedly say that the mods try whenever possible to save a thread that goes off the rails, especially when people have obviously put a lot of thought and work into contributing. Sometimes it's fairly straightforward to delete some back-and-forth sniping and let it get back on track. At other times inappropriate thoughts or posts can be intertwined with legitimate ones and it becomes very difficult to pick and choose what to leave in and what to delete. If personal attacks persist (not applicable in this thread) or if the inappropriate comments get too complex, there's no other choice but to delete the whole thread. The mods have neither the time, the mandate, nor the skills to surgically edit threads. It's really up to each poster to monitor their own content.

Many a thread has started out perfectly well but was taken in unacceptable directions and had to go, quite a few that I was personally sorry to lose. The TOUs may not be a perfect fit for everyone's discussion paramaters but they are the house rules we all agreed to as members for discussion in this particular venue. The mods have the same guidelines as everyone else. We're all in the same boat.

Right, Rubes. You more clearly expressed something I was getting at - I don't think it's too much to ask why an entire thread got yanked. I have found it rather conspicuous that no moderators have commented. I think moderating comes with at least some modicum of responsibility to the other forum contributors to explain the reasoning when yanking an entire thread. I don't that's unreasonable to ask.

Sharil, see above. We both posted at the same time.

I should add that my post is purely speaking from my own perspective; I'm not speaking on behalf of other mods.

Your thread was deleted. It needed to be deleted because of inappropriate posts to it that contravened the Perfume of Life Community Code of Conduct.

Just wanted to give you a heads up.



I'll probably be punished but the above was sent to my Message box. I don't know what to think. I must have missed something. I was not of the mind that anything was inappropriate, but then I am not in total control. Thanks for everyone's input and support, hope I can still post here. I love POL and all the friends that I've made here.

Darlin , I have no idea what a mod slap looks like but to me that looks like a simple courtesy PM explaining to you what happened to your thread. I'm sure you are just fine.

Tjen, very often the original post has nothing to do with the reason a thread is deleted. Many an innocent thread has been derailed somewhere down the line far from the OP's intent.

Well, I know what a mod slap looks like, and that wasn't one. Not at all.

Your thread was fun and people were enjoying it. I know it's upsetting to have it yanked, but you did good.

Again, thanks for the support......Just wanted all to know what happened

How unfortunate. I read most of the posts after people started to be frank about why they waxed or did not, and it was all factual. Nothing titilating, nothing targeted at other posters.

This forum is about rules, not about having a good or useful conversation. I wonder how long that will fly with perfumistas? If entire threads need to be pulled so frequently, clearly the forum is not meeting the needs of paying subscribers. It's not going to change because mods who are enslaved to the TOU are in place, but it should.

Agree 100% with the above. I would like to add, for the record, that the mods work very hard at letting each discussion run its course as long as it possibly can, and enforcing the COC and the TOU fairly and evenly.

When we joined POL, we all agreed to the TOU. If you disagree with the TOU, then you have some choices which I will not delineate here, as we are all intelligent people. But posting outside of the TOU is not one of them.

POL is a very civilized place where, in general, the level of discussion is quite high, the level of personal sniping is quite low, and the intelligence of the community as a whole is tremendous. The TOU help serve to keep it all that way. Go anywhere else on the web and see what the discussion is like. There was one other board that I used to post to (devoted to weight loss) that I eventually left because the atmosphere was so unbelievably childish. I reached the point where every time I logged on, I felt like I was in middle school with all of the ridiculous sniping. POL, thankfully, rises above that 99.99% of the time. That's why I'm here, and I know I'm not alone.

Personal attacks are easily distinguishable from general sexual facts in the context of a discussion about grooming pubic hair. It's not a slippery slope. I've moderated literally a dozen boards-- unless you're working for a school or the government, TOU are just a lengthy pontification.

The TOU is not what keeps things civil here-- things get uncivil (and disappear) all the time. The fact that most people who want to talk about perfume are middle-aged females with significant disposable income, a demo not typical on almost any other board, keeps the wildness quotient low.

Lauren, the TOU and Code of Conduct are an agreement between the site owner and the member.

It's slipperier if you wax.. or some say.

Thanks , sweetie ;>)!




Naughty, naughty...LOL!

{{{{tjen}}}}} hugs...I enjoy your posts and you'd better not go anywhere!

I watched the thread, i was sure from the first monet on it would be deleted, i wondered how long it took, to be honest. I found it extremely interesting and open, which i like.

I did not contribute to the deleted thread which i maybe should have done but i know now again why i chose not to post anymore in the "Life" section. "Life" HERE is not life like i see life myself.
I'll go back to Perfume-section.
Full stop.

Look, I respect the TOUs I am not nearly implying that we shouldn't have them. My issue is with interpretation. Lauren said it well - we weren't being titillating, merely factual about something rather intimate. It's easy to see when someone is posting from an honest place or just to be sensational. The raunchy post should have been deleted and the rest of the thread retained.

BTW, I do appreciate how hard the mods try to let a thread go on...etc...as Alto posts. However...is it so hard to ever say that they may have made a mistake or gone to far? I've never, ever seen that and I think they can make errors in judgment like anyone. Also, isn't feedback from the members about how a whole lot of us feel about particular actions a good thing? Does it have to go to a place of "the rules are the rules and follow them or find the road"? I think we can have a discourse about it because the rules aren't just the rules, babes: whole lotta interpretation in there too. We're letting the mods know how many of us felt about the pulling of this thread - is it such a bad thing to take that in and incorporate it into future actions?

For the record, Five-O and Altodiva, though you both weighed in on the difficulty of modding and the contract of the TOUs, etc., neither of you answered the question I asked:

In this PARTICULAR case (Tjen's thread on the removal of body hair), did members of the community COMPLAIN, or did the mods pull the thread because they deemed it a violation? It's a simple question.

And the follow up was, if it was pulled due to a complaint, roughly how many complaints were received? One? Twenty?

I don't think answering those questions violates anyone's privacy or any of the TOUs on this board.

Sharil, with regard to interpretation, if a person is discussing an off-limits subject from an honest place, it's still outside the criteria.


Ruby, those questions do violate privacy and we don't discuss communications from members.

What a wonderful start to my day......thanks and I am still here, lol

I agree with Mary, Carla.
Your posts are bright spots here on POL. Perish the thought of leaving!

This is a huge site , huge membership , to be able to say something like "that thread had been flagged by numerous complaints" or simply to mention that the number of upset peeps was significantly high would hardly be a violaton of privacy or a reveal of private communications. Just my own opinion, not going out of my way to be difficult but I am very curious.

I don't want to put words in Carla's mouth, but I think she wasn't implying that she wanted to leave, only that the worried she might get kicked off for starting a thread that became controversial.

And on the subject of yanking threads, I agree that it wouldn't compromise anyone's privacy to respond with something like, "Yes, we got several complaints" or "No, we only got one or two complaints, but that was enough" or "No, we often zap threads that are going astray of the TOUs even if there are no complaints" -- answers like that. On the other hand, I don't know how useful that information would be.

It occurred to me to ask a different question: is there an option of just closing or locking a thread, i.e., preventing additional posts from being added, without completely deleting it? That way, the unobjectionable content could be preserved.

Obviously, but that's missing my point. I'll try one more time. Here is the bit that relates to this particular thread:

"
6. No Profanity, Vulgarity or Overt Sexual References.
Perfume, food and the arts are sensual and discussions may at times have light sexual connotations. Profanity, vulgarity and overt sexual conversation, references and images are not allowed. "

OK, fine and dandy. Most intelligent people can figure out what that means so it's not all that usefule to restate the already very obvious guideline. My point is how does one define "overt sexual conversation"? Are we going for the spirit of the law or the letter of the law here? I think this rule was intended to keep us from being raunchy and disgustion, not from every talking about anything sexual in concrete, straighforward terms. After all, sex is part of life. Perhaps that is indeed the intent: that we should just never discuss anything sexual. If so, that's rather disappointing.

Yes, I know there are other forums. Yes, I know I can leave. I like it here and and think we are adult enough to discuss these things in a reasonable way. The idea that we aren't trusted to do so is disappointing. OK, I'm done.