Me, too. And I'm taking a more active role in reporting items. Before I thought a "report" would just be a bother to Jeff, but, I, too, would like to get rid of some of the very nasty comments - usually the first or second response to someone asking for advice or help. Comments like "you sound defensive" or "unhinged" help no one and get the threads off to a bad start.

I think some of us are getting better about reporting abusive posts or potential trolls also.

I know I've reported a couple of things recently, whereas previously I would have just stood by.

I appreciate Jeff's efforts on this front.

Thank you for being responsive to requests to remove unnecessarily rude and cruel remarks in Special Needs.

Anonymous wrote:Was one of the trolls the person who posted about her fiance and how she asked about his dead parents? She posted yesterday and then a new thread last night. He ran off. I saw it this morning, and now I see the thread is gone.

Nevermind. I just saw the thread in the Relationship forum about the troll. Good catch, Jeff.

if some threads get deleted, it is 1000x better than Fairfax underground and other very mean and pointless threads. good work, Jeff. Especially on the mean first or second poste people.

Was one of the trolls the person who posted about her fiance and how she asked about his dead parents? She posted yesterday and then a new thread last night. He ran off. I saw it this morning, and now I see the thread is gone.

I was also going to suggest locking some threads, perhaps after you post the reason, instead of wholesale deleting in order to retain a quality conversation.

Anonymous wrote:Jeff--I think it might be better in case #3, to leave the thread and lock it. Maybe removing a handful of the later off-topic or rude posts. But as long as it isn't a troll (like the one today), there are a lot of people who are interested in the topic that may not get to see the later responses. I know that when I get busy, I sometimes only get to check DCUM once a day or every other day. If there were one or two threads that were interesting, I'll go back to check on them, only to find that they may have been deleted and I don't get to read the later pages before it goes completely off-topic.

Plus, if it is a topic that had helpful information on the earlier pages, then someone might want to reference the thread later, a month or two, or even a year or two later, for the helpful information from the earlier pages.

This is a good suggestion and something I actually try to do when time allows. I deleted a thread today that I probably could have handled differently, but I took one look, considered what else I had to do, and hit the delete key because I simply didn't have time for anything else.

Jeff--I think it might be better in case #3, to leave the thread and lock it. Maybe removing a handful of the later off-topic or rude posts. But as long as it isn't a troll (like the one today), there are a lot of people who are interested in the topic that may not get to see the later responses. I know that when I get busy, I sometimes only get to check DCUM once a day or every other day. If there were one or two threads that were interesting, I'll go back to check on them, only to find that they may have been deleted and I don't get to read the later pages before it goes completely off-topic.

Plus, if it is a topic that had helpful information on the earlier pages, then someone might want to reference the thread later, a month or two, or even a year or two later, for the helpful information from the earlier pages.

Thanks for the thoughtful explanation.

There are no hard and fast rules. A lot has to do with how busy I am when a thread removal is requested. But, there have been a lot of thread removals and post removals. Here is why:

1) I have received an increased number of complaints about rude replies. I have been able to identify a handful of posters who post an abnormally high number of rude posts. So, I am giving them more attention then usual and removing their posts fairly routinely;

2) I discovered a very active troll today and removed several threads started by that poster;

3) Some threads -- including the one that I suspect you are referring to -- are started by posters who get upset when the threads turn in unexpected and unhelpful directions. I will sometimes remove these because they are no longer on topic and basically only generating negativity.

4) I remove threads when posters believe they have revealed too much personal information.

5) I am a stupid liberal indoctrinated in stupid liberal thinking and remove posts by conservatives because such posts threaten the fragile world I've created inside my head.

The last one is false, but will still be the only one many posters believe.

I am sensitive to the argument you make and understand that it is frustrating to put effort into responses and then see them go away. Therefore, I try not to delete threads willy-nilly. But, there will be times that while you may disagree with the removal of a thread, I will hope that you will still accept it as a necessary evil of our format.

I seem to see posts all the time now from people who participated in a thread that has been since deleted. What is the threshold for you to decide what gets nixed and what stays? Obviously if someone starts a thread it started out as theirs. But once members of this community start weighing in and having a conversation I would imagine it starts to become community property. I know i've been annoyed when I've spent time responding to a question from a poster to later find it was deleted. Can you shed light on what stays and what goes? Thanks, Jeff.