and you are not concerned with anything I am saying,
Actually, I have a great concern about what you are saying and hence my raising the issue. This is not the first time you have moved private comments into the public forum and you are the only moderator i've seen do this, hence my raising the issue.
rather you are more worried about finding something, anything you can to argue.
Rot. It's an issue I raised last time you did it and it should have been obvious to you i'd raise having caught you doing it again.
Whatever floats your boat, but don't get all shocked when I decide to not play along. Anyway, here goes for the last and final time.
If you don't want it raised perhaps you should consider your actions.
I was asked why the original thread was deleted.
Actually Kroc, you weren't asked any such thing (well not above anyway).
NOW, a moderators reasons for deleting a thread as far as I know are not "confidential".
Never said they were .. however the thread was deleted because a rule was breached, not because "someone got upset at being called a whore".
You say: I wacked your last thread, because someone was "upset" at being called a whore.
Then you say I deleted a post, that was requested for deletion by yes the user 'Glenn' saying "he wasn't a whore".
The second statement does not validate the first. You actually posted your opinion of the forum deletion request and in doing so you appear to have misrepresented it in a negative way. Saying "he wasn't a whore" is not "upset" at being called a whore at all, it's merely pointing out an inaccuracy.
In this instance, I said that a user being parodied did not like it,
Not until post 30 you didn't. (after you were taken to task for your behaviour).
and therefore, according to the new established guidelines is grounds for deletion. Not likes its a big deal.
The fact that the post was deleted or that someone requested it isn't a big deal, you might try and grasp the concept, it may help with the discussion.
Now, I never mentioned who, although in this case, for the astute observer, it would be one of 2 people, but 99.9% of us most likely could care less.
No, because 99% of you weren't one of the 2 people mentioned, nor were 99% of you represented as "being upset at being called a whore", which as seen above appears to be a misrepresentation on your part. I was one of the 2 mentioned above and I do not like the inference that you made. As you are aware, this is not the first time I have been on the receiving end of you releasing information from those forum deletion post messages into the public forum.
In me making it more wider known the delete reason....it was because it went along with the newly established guidelines of users being parodied, I simply made it known again MY reasoning for deletion.
Wow! you've told everyone that ADG *or* Glenn don't like being called a whore, you didn't mention parody and you weren't asked for justification. Indeed the original poster whilst having his whinge above was quite specific about some type of private discussion between himself and the moderator who deleted the post (you). Thus indicating that it had been discussed already with him and no further discussion was required, particularly in the public forum.
Guess what, if Glenn doesn't want to be parodied, the users cannot guess that, or if he doesn't want to be called a "whore" even in an off the wall joking manner, the users cannot guess that, so in essence, if becomes the mods job to get that known.
What garbage. IT
has nothing to do with *parody* (one thing that is becomming very clear is that you guys have no idea about what parody is). This was clearly a specific incident. By your logic you have told the forum that Glenn or I don't like being parodied, but that's simply garbage and not based in any fact at all. Its' simply your interpretation of the facts based on one forum deletion post made by one person. Incorrect, irrelevant and unnecessary under the circumstances.
I'm not *fired up*, i'm merely pointing out the the facts. You opened the discussion up when you decided to make what appears to be a smart arse comment that misrepresents the facts.
You know, a way of avoiding offending posts before they start or continue.
Pointing people at the rules would be more appropriate.
If you still have a problem with that, like I said, its on you, not me.
I dont' accept that.
I stand my my deletion,
I haven't questioned that.
and I stand my my reasoning,
I haven't questioned that either (assuming we are talking about the reasoning behind the deletion).
as well as informing WN why his post was deleted.
This is where we differ in opinions. I think that if he has engaged in discussion already in private, why air it in public and in the manner in which you did?
He was the one who started the new thread, listing off reasons why. I did not tell him to do so, or use any of my reasoning for the original deletion that he gets in his email (as you are well aware of yourself), and ultimately that is the reason why your "confidential" information became public.
I disagree. Seems to me he piqued your pride and you snapped back in what I feel is an inappropriate manner and I don't think you've justified that action at all.
If anything, give him a ration of crap, as I stand fully behind my actions.
Give him crap? Hmm.. he did identify the moderator and have a whinge, but he's a user, if that breaches the rules in any way you should have utilised the Suggest Deletion button instead of engaging in a tit for tat attack, this is a standard suggestion given by many moderators to us users, you should be well aware of that. There was no requirement for you to respond as you did and as you are one that moderates the site your behaviour should be an example for the rest of us, what example have you shown us here Kroc?