Moderator deletion of serious discussion in the Wall Observer

[nullius]

I didn't remove them but there's a few reports against you there for off topic posts.

Love to know by whom. The WO is supposed to be a place where pretty much anything goes. It’s bad form to be reporting stuff in the WO; I hope it isn’t a regular poster there.

Reports to the moderators are supposed to be confidential.  Much though I myself want to know which ovine retard filled with petty spite decided to try to shut me up with false reports (and I can’t help but think to myself a few guesses), I think that I should better leave that knowledge to the forum staff.  They should take notice of who makes reports in bad faith, and be guided accordingly.

(Edited to add—by way of contrary example:  As hilarious can easily verify, I myself am judicious with my reporting.  In public discussions, I exercise my right to express myself as I please.  Whereas I take mod reports very seriously.  I would never report a post in bad faith—let alone ignore a red-lettered note on the reports page, which warns that a report should not be made!  Reports should be made dispassionately—and never only, or even primarily on the basis of personal dislike for the author of a post.  If I dislike the author of a post that I am reporting, I oft consciously double-check and ask myself what I would do if I didn’t know who wrote it.)

OTOH if it was reported as "off-topic" then the moderator should have looked which thread it's in.

I refrained from commenting on this, because I pretty much assumed that an ordinary intelligent moderator handling an “off-topic” report must perforce ascertain what the topic is supposed to be.  Thank you for contributing your explanation.

Looking at the posts quoted earlier in the thread it looks like [WO] is part of the the post title that nullius created.

This may have been a hint—right here, upthread in a thread on which you are commenting:

I like to keep things organized.  Properly labelled.  For the same reason, because WO is special, I retitle my WO posts with a “[WO]” marker.

I assume that you saw that.  Although you claim to have me on ignore, it would show exceedingly poor judgment to comment on a thread without reading OP, and OP’s responses.

Would love the deleter to explain his or hers reasoning for killing it off.

^^^ Good question.

To be clear I am not a fan of nullius, but a good post is still a good post.

I will express my due respect for your fairness here, without disclaiming that I am not your fan, either. ;-)

Truly hilariousandco should appreciate your level of "hilariousness", nullius...

Indeed.  If his name checks out, then he should be one of my biggest fans!  

That said, this is a serious thread.  Much though I enjoy interposing a moment of levity, I share your hope for serious answers here.

I didn't remove them but there's a few reports against you there for off topic posts.

Thanks for the reply.  Aren’t “off-topic” reports for WO supposed to be marked as bad by the forum moderators?

[Hueristic]

Report button in WO should be remapped to OP (infofront currently) or removed entirely and that would take care of this issue.

[1miau]

Looks like I was one of those reporting it since hilariousandco said you had a few reports against you. Maybe more people are annoyed but too afraid to speak up because they will get hit by another spam wall.   

I’ve never reported anything on WO before because there was nothing close of being up for reports but when reading WO with great TA, great stats and a positive attitude to reach new ATHs for BTC, in opposite your spam walls (whereof 2/3 aren’t even mentioning Bitcoin in a single word; I could argue about the fluffypony post) are surely annoying in my opinion. I’ve considered it as obvious off-topic spam and undoubtedly, a moderator shared my view and deleted it.
I wasn’t sure if it’ll get deleted, so Kudos to the mod, I’m supporting this move 100%.

We have a similar local topic (German) called “Der aktuelle Kursverlauf” (German WO). Moderation is relatively strict there and I’m always advocating for less moderation there. Even posts which are about Bitcoin but not directly tied to price discussion are frequently deleted there (happened to me once).
So, it means a lot that I’ve reported some of your posts (I’m rarely reporting on “Der aktuelle Kursverlauf”).
And as said before, I’ve never reported anything on WO before.

After all I can’t understand why you are getting so extremely butthurt because someone deleted your spamwalls. ^^


WO is a place where I’m awaiting positivity about Bitcoin, not obvious off-topic spam walls.

Just my 2 sats.   

[V8s Road Warrior]

[1miau]

[Cryptotourist]

WO is a place where I’m awaiting positivity about Bitcoin, not obvious off-topic spam walls.

Per sway? I hope it's not too toxic for ya.

[JayJuanGee]

Looks like I was one of those reporting it since hilariousandco said you had a few reports against you. Maybe more people are annoyed but too afraid to speak up because they will get hit by another spam wall.   

I’ve never reported anything on WO before because there was nothing close of being up for reports but when reading WO with great TA, great stats and a positive attitude to reach new ATHs for BTC, in opposite your spam walls (whereof 2/3 aren’t even mentioning Bitcoin in a single word; I could argue about the fluffypony post) are surely annoying in my opinion. I’ve considered it as obvious off-topic spam and undoubtedly, a moderator shared my view and deleted it.
I wasn’t sure if it’ll get deleted, so Kudos to the mod, I’m supporting this move 100%.

We have a similar local topic (German) called “Der aktuelle Kursverlauf” (German WO). Moderation is relatively strict there and I’m always advocating for less moderation there. Even posts which are about Bitcoin but not directly tied to price discussion are frequently deleted there (happened to me once).
So, it means a lot that I’ve reported some of your posts (I’m rarely reporting on “Der aktuelle Kursverlauf”).
And as said before, I’ve never reported anything on WO before.

After all I can’t understand why you are getting so extremely butthurt because someone deleted your spamwalls. ^^


WO is a place where I’m awaiting positivity about Bitcoin, not obvious off-topic spam walls.

Just my 2 sats.   

Decent points, 1miau.  Seems reasonable that there should at least be attempts to tie walls of text into bitcoin... and not just by mentioning bitcoin here and there, but substantively.

I have been around the WO thread as much as many other forum members, and surely I have witnessed that there are a lot of off-topic rants that are allowed to stay and even endure for days and weeks on end without much if any attempt to remove them - so I am not really sure exactly how disparities would be resolved regarding why some off-topic rants are allowed to stay, while others, such as nullius-type rants that do NOT even attempt to tie in bitcoin, are not allowed to stand - just like with any moderator decision, there may be something about the pervasiveness of the off-topicness rather than merely that off-topicness happens that cause the moderator to conclude that the off-topicness has crossed over some kind of line that is not exactly clear, since we all know that sporadic and even persistent off-topicness is considerably tolerated in WO...

[Cryptotourist]

Can I just point out that I've never had a post deleted on WO.
For anyone that has read them ... well, I'm sure JJG can attest that this means a lot.

[nullius]

Just my 2 sats.  

Doge sats, obviously.  You are not a very good cat; and your ignorance about Bitcoin is astonishing:

in opposite your spam walls (whereof 2/3 aren’t even mentioning Bitcoin in a single word; I could argue about the fluffypony post)

• Newbie protip #0:  fluffypony is (or at some point was?) a self-described Bitcoin maximalist.  He oftentimes comments on Bitcoin, especially on Bitcoin privacy and fungibility issues.  The fluffy tweet that I posted was specifically and only about Bitcoin—which you would know, if you had actually read it.  —By the way, do you know what p2pool and Stratum v2 are?  Do you know anything about Bitcoin?  
• Reading comprehension protip #0:  You should read a post before commenting on it!  That was not “a fluffypony post” (!).  It cited Riccardo Spagni as a source, because he had been cited by the Russian-language article which gave me a heads-up on an existential threat to Bitcoin, its privacy, and its fungibility.  (And that in turn came from the Russian analysis thread, which has much more serious discussion than WO or almost anywhere else in the English-language forum.)
• Reading comprehension protip question #1:  Who taught you to read, so that you could write with neither reading nor thinking?
  

  Dass Jedermann lesen lernen darf, verdirbt auf die Dauer nicht allein das Schreiben, sondern auch das Denken.

• Newbie protip #1:  Read the rules.  WTF is it with n00bs who do not read the rules?
  
  

  Special Wall Observer rules: bitcointalk.org moderators do not moderate the Wall Observer thread for multi-posting (except obvious spam), trolling, or on-topicness. Do not use this form to report those violations; instead, contact the thread owner. Reports of other rule violations are OK here.

• Newbie protip #2:  Lurk more.  (← nullius doesn’t do moar cuter spellings.)  You don’t know what the WO thread is about.

Original topic title: Should Bitcoin Wall Observer thread be deleted? (original OP)

extremely toxic community

Cf.:

I’m awaiting positivity

So, instead of building what you want, you want to turn the existing thread into something that it is not, and never has been.  Instead of advocating that others should file bad-faith reports against the rule stated on the reporting page, why don’t you go make a tempest in a teacup.

<snip nonsense and insults beneath reply>

Your opinions are duly noted, and filed in “taken under advisement”. 🗑️

I was amidst much extending this post, when others popped up.  inb4 CT re SwayStar, etc.  I may edit this space (or post further if the thread gets ahead of me).

In defence of the honour of cats, I should mention that <long Lauda story that I was writing as the thread got ahead of me>.  Despite what I said earlier, I think that Lauda would have made an excellent Wall moderator.  I expect that she probably would have deleted somewhat more posts than infofront has; but not unreasonably so, for she understood the Wall!  I was paying infofront what was perhaps the highest compliment that I could.

Editing in a brief abstract:

The “long Lauda story” was directly topical to WO, insofar as my Wall knowledge did not begin when I started actively to post there in March.  Once upon a time, the kitty-catbat-witch first introduced me to WO as part of some private mentoring on “how to do the forum”:  Trust system, moderation system, significant forum history, forum culture and etiquette, etc., etc.  I may never have even seen WO otherwise:  I am not a speculator, so I do not generally venture into the speculation forums.

I must emphasize that my opinions are my own.  As I have said before, Lauda oftentimes cordially disagreed with me; I am hereby speaking not for her, but only for myself!  However, it bears noting that when I make grand pronouncements as if by long experience, it has some greater basis than may be inferred from my activity.  It is indeed on the same basis that I have been not infrequently accused of being an alt for an old account—no; my level of knowledge about the forum rises from (0) having on-and-off lurked, especially in Development & Technical Discussion, for years before I registered; and (1) a bit of subsequent initiation into the dark arts of witchcraft. 😼

On a related note:

... judicious ... seriously ... dispassionately ...

It is a hint that there is a side of me which may not be perceived from a shallow view of my public posts.  I should not need to make that explicit; for anyone with even a modicum of practical wisdom knows that a public persona gives limited information, anyway.

Significant edits:  Immediately after posting re V8s, about an hour after the fact with elaboration thereupon, and then much later to add some anchor tags.

[suchmoon]

~

Merit for coming forward but please don't report WO posts for off topic... Something grave like doxing or plagiarism should be reported but other than that - leave it to infofront to decide and use "Ignore" judiciously.

[nutildah]

Yeah don't do that.

We can pretty much moderate ourselves.

To those for whom nullius posts actually pose a problem, there's the Ignore button -- it works quite well, I should know. I like the off-topic-ness of that thread and appreciate the opportunity to banter with some of the regulars about any subject that is slightly or more interesting.

Am not sure if I ever had a post removed from WO by a mod, ever.

[1miau]

Just my 2 sats.  

You are not a very good cat;

So sad to hear. 

and your ignorance about Bitcoin is astonishing:

Hey, I haven't ignored Bitcoin. 
And I've never questioned fluffypony's quotes from your post.

• Newbie protip #1:  Read the rules.  WTF is it with n00bs who do not read the rules?
  
  

  Special Wall Observer rules: bitcointalk.org moderators do not moderate the Wall Observer thread for multi-posting (except obvious spam), trolling, or on-topicness. Do not use this form to report those violations; instead, contact the thread owner. Reports of other rule violations are OK here.

100% agreed. 

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

Obey. 

I must emphasize that my opinions are my own.  As I have said before, Lauda oftentimes cordially disagreed with me; I am hereby speaking not for her, but only for myself!  However, it bears noting that when I make grand pronouncements as if by long experience, it has some greater basis than may be inferred from my activity.  It is indeed on the same basis that I have been not infrequently accused of being an alt for an old account—no; my level of knowledge about the forum rises from (0) having on-and-off lurked, especially in Development & Technical Discussion, for years before I registered; and (1) a bit of subsequent initiation into the dark arts of witchcraft. 😼

I totally appreciate your insightful technical posts and your posts about privacy (if you have a look at my post history you'll also find quite a few topics advocating for privacy). Also a reason why I'm not using an ignore button here. In general I'm not using it at all and had no trouble so far.
After all it's an discussion forum (with some rules). 

And my intention was not to harm the WO (never would be).
I'm also not complaining about any food since it has become quite amusing and a visualisation of high BTC prices.

[bitserve]

Yeah... please... don't.

[Cryptotourist]

And my intention was not to harm the WO (never would be).
I'm also not complaining about any food since it has become quite amusing and a visualisation of high BTC prices.

Great, glad you like the food section of the WO.
But when you report a post that you dislike (and gets deleted too), you're actually hurting WO. Is it too hard to understand?
WO is not about what you like or dislike. We sort ourselves out, without any need of moderation, a little corner of free expression.

Maybe you should try it, instead of shooting like a swaying star.
In fact I urge you, to take it up with nullius on the WO. Or with anyone else for that matter. I have my pop corn ready.

[El duderino_]

One should always respect the WO as its the largest thread, very old thread.... and full of bitcoin-historic-heroic moments....

Please do not report anything there... we got infofront taking care of business and tons of regs... who spot things that should be nuked ....

[V8s Road Warrior]

Mixed results there for the hatless cats.

Thank you once again, theymos, for re-orging the Wall Observer; it's a joy to me, and clearly a few others.

[hilariousetc]

I didn't remove them but there's a few reports against you there for off topic posts.

Love to know by whom. The WO is supposed to be a place where pretty much anything goes. It’s bad form to be reporting stuff in the WO; I hope it isn’t a regular poster there.

Reports to the moderators are supposed to be confidential.  

Yeah, I don't mind sharing what the report was for as people have a right to know it requested and it can help prevent further mistakes either by that user or staff, but who reported it should be left up to the individual if they want to make themselves known.

Report button in WO should be remapped to OP (infofront currently) or removed entirely and that would take care of this issue.

It shouldn't be removed as people can post malicious stuff in there that would need to be removed quickly. There's been multiple waves of spambots recently and many or posting malicious links so they need to be acted upon ASAP.

[Hueristic]

Report button in WO should be remapped to OP (infofront currently) or removed entirely and that would take care of this issue.

It shouldn't be removed as people can post malicious stuff in there that would need to be removed quickly. There's been multiple waves of spambots recently and many or posting malicious links so they need to be acted upon ASAP.

We know how to use a PM system.

[Csmiami]

We know how to use a PM system.

That means you'll PM every person with the ability to handle the situation? Or only some of them and hope they are online? Report feature is way faster and more useful for these situations

[nullius]

Yeah, I don't mind sharing what the report was for as people have a right to know it requested and it can help prevent further mistakes either by that user or staff, but who reported it should be left up to the individual if they want to make themselves known.

Thanks for the reply.  Should that be taken as confirmation that this was a mistake by staff, and such reports should be marked as “bad”?

That said, this is a serious thread.  Much though I enjoy interposing a moment of levity, I share your hope for serious answers here.

I didn't remove them but there's a few reports against you there for off topic posts.

Thanks for the reply.  Aren’t “off-topic” reports for WO supposed to be marked as bad by the forum moderators?

Report button in WO should be remapped to OP (infofront currently) or removed entirely and that would take care of this issue.

It shouldn't be removed as people can post malicious stuff in there that would need to be removed quickly. There's been multiple waves of spambots recently and many or posting malicious links so they need to be acted upon ASAP.

We know how to use a PM system.

I assumed that you were making a rhetorical point, Hueristic, which is why I did not reply.  Unfortunately, this being the Internet, theymos for needs his staff to do 24/7 immediate handling of stuff that needs to be nuked from orbit.

As alluded in OP hereby, to date, I myself have thus far reported exactly one post in WO:

It was pure, unadulterated spam from a pure spammer account that staff summarily “nuked”, thus deleting all of its posts and banning it in one shot:

• Nuke user: N/A in topic #0 by member #2875279

That is from a saved copy of the modlog.  It has probably scrolled off by now.

Meta Log

DateTime	Action	Detail
11/6/2020 6:26:20 AM	Changed to Archived status	Nuke user

I try to do Kitty proud. 😼

~

Merit for coming forward

You are adept at raining down source merits for criticisms that suit your petty personal grudges.  It is far from the first or only time (and I will admit, to my shame, that I have been the beneficiary of that in the past).  Do you need an “unapplication” filled out for you?  

but please don't report WO posts for off topic... Something grave like doxing or plagiarism should be reported but other than that - leave it to infofront to decide and use "Ignore" judiciously.

I actually do not use the forum’s ignore function.  I tried it, when I was a new user.  Didn’t like it.

I do not even ignore you and cryptohunter, whom I consider to be two sides of the same coin.

On the other hand, my mental ignore function automagically files the majority of the forum in “taken under advisement”. 🗑️

To those for whom nullius posts actually pose a problem, there's the Ignore button -- it works quite well, I should know.

True, I have decreed that nutildah and some others are banned from reading my posts.

nutildah obeys.

Just my 2 sats.  

You are not a very good cat;

So sad to hear.  

Awww.  I have a soft spot for cats. 😿

This nonexistent cat wonders
if you would report as off-topic the posts that
I myself (repeatedly), Toxic2040, and JayJuanGee made
to discuss Lauda and/or kitty AI image generation of “cat-shaped objects”.

In a yet-unpublished post (ironically in reply to mikeywith in Reputation; I should finish that), I remarked that I sometimes find it helpful to read a post without looking at its author’s name.  That applies both to good posts, and to things that come off as surprisingly... otherwise.  If you come off the way that you did, then—well, then you will get the response that you got.

I totally appreciate your insightful technical posts and your posts about privacy (if you have a look at my post history you'll also find quite a few topics advocating for privacy). Also a reason why I'm not using an ignore button here. In general I'm not using it at all and had no trouble so far.
After all it's an discussion forum (with some rules).  

True.  I am not sure how I missed this back in January.  (I first happened across it last month or so.)  The bilingual multiple versioning of your own post is a remarkable effort.  (And I know something about putting time and effort into posts, including some of those deleted in this instance.)

You are obviously just as much an ignorant n00b as I myself produce

surely annoying
spam walls.

So, don’t get

so extremely butthurt

that I called you out in due turn.

And I've never questioned fluffypony's quotes from your post.

You called it a

fluffypony post

—which it was assuredly not.

• Newbie protip #1:  Read the rules.  WTF is it with n00bs who do not read the rules?
  
  

  Special Wall Observer rules: bitcointalk.org moderators do not moderate the Wall Observer thread for multi-posting (except obvious spam), trolling, or on-topicness. Do not use this form to report those violations; instead, contact the thread owner. Reports of other rule violations are OK here.

100% agreed.  

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

Obey.  

I am way ahead of you, in OP on this thread—even with the same quote that you have helpfully highlighted for me:

For my part, I am usually supportive of the moderators; they have a hard job, and I have no wish to make it harder.  However, if I were to say nothing about this publicly, then I would hereafter need perpetually to second-guess myself on whether I have permission to discuss Big Tech censorship (!) and Bitcoin transaction censorship (!!) on this forum.  Inter alia.

In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

I would feel thus a chill wind blow over my ability to engage in serious discussion here, if I did not place the individual who deleted my posts on notice that I will call out exceptionally stupid moderation decisions.