I give up trying to help I really do.
Posted 26/01/2011 - 17:16
Link
Hear Hear
Posted 26/01/2011 - 17:28
Link
Sorry to hear that Bob. It might be better if the OP was able remove the post when the item was no longer available. There shouldn't really be anyone else writing in that thread anyway. Alternatively move the post to a Completed Deals/No Longer Available thread for say 7 days and then delete.
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber
Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff
Algi
Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff
Algi
Posted 26/01/2011 - 17:31
Link
I put on a link to one on AV Forums. Mike bought it. The thread was then removed.
I PM'd John asking if I had done something wrong. He said no, and explained that in order to prevent clogging up of "leads to deals" with expirerd deals, he would remove them once they were expired
Hope this explains.
I PM'd John asking if I had done something wrong. He said no, and explained that in order to prevent clogging up of "leads to deals" with expirerd deals, he would remove them once they were expired
Hope this explains.
Posted 26/01/2011 - 17:43
Link
Quote:
I resent being treated like a mushroom here.
Dont take it personally Bob, I'm sure your a "fun guy" to be withI resent being treated like a mushroom here.
But yes it does make sense to remove a link to something if its no longer for sale, and we cant expect the mods to be following up with PM to members as well everytime the forum is cleaned up in this way.
Posted 26/01/2011 - 17:43
Link
That's great then - it served it's purpose. Would be great to be kept in the loop though when it's taken down.
Posted 26/01/2011 - 17:44
Link
We have had this conversation before and I think all agreed that de-clogging was necessary - however a quick PM to the OP would not go amiss. Or even better, the MOD posts to the effect that the deal has gone, then removes the thread next day.
Posted 26/01/2011 - 17:46
Link
It's really the same a when someone puts a "for sale postcard" in a shop window, the shopkeeper takes it down as soon as he knows it's been sold. It can make it difficult for someone (as well as the OP) who's trying to find the thread to check back on details to compare with another offer etc.
The government are banning the sale of photographic gear shortly anyway
The government are banning the sale of photographic gear shortly anyway
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber
Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff
Algi
Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff
Algi
Posted 26/01/2011 - 17:51
Link
ISO wrote:
I think all agreed that de-clogging was necessary
No we didn't I disagreed then, and I still disagree now. It seems like a waste of JR's time to me, but he is keen to continue removing threads where the deal has expired. I'm not really sure why, apparently it is to keep things tidy and up to date but in that case why do we still have meeting arrangements from 2007 in the Local Groups and Meetings section?
I think all agreed that de-clogging was necessary
Tim
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27”, Macbook Pro 17”, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr • Fluidr • PPG • Street • Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27”, Macbook Pro 17”, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr • Fluidr • PPG • Street • Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
Posted 26/01/2011 - 17:55
Link
?[/quote][And you dont think the mods have enough to do already?[/quote]
thoughton wrote:
So the MODS seem to have a conflicting position??
ISO wrote:
I think all agreed that de-clogging was necessary
No we didn't I disagreed then, and I still disagree now. It seems like a waste of JR's time to me, but he is keen to continue removing threads where the deal has expired. I'm not really sure why, apparently it is to keep things tidy and up to date but in that case why do we still have meeting arrangements from 2007 in the Local Groups and Meetings section?I think all agreed that de-clogging was necessary
Posted 26/01/2011 - 18:11
Link
First of all, if you want to know why a thread has been removed, rather than take umbrage just ask.
As for Leads to Deals, it's been explained that expired deals are removed so we can see the wood for the trees, so to speak. There's no time to tell everyone every time it happens, because it happens all the time. We can also expect that the threads will eventually disappear, so nothing to report really.
If for no other reason, it's best to leave discussions out of Leads to Deals because when the deal expires the discussion will expire as well. Right from the start part of the deal was that this section would be closely moderated, so no grumbles please. That's all in the guidance notes.
As for Leads to Deals, it's been explained that expired deals are removed so we can see the wood for the trees, so to speak. There's no time to tell everyone every time it happens, because it happens all the time. We can also expect that the threads will eventually disappear, so nothing to report really.
If for no other reason, it's best to leave discussions out of Leads to Deals because when the deal expires the discussion will expire as well. Right from the start part of the deal was that this section would be closely moderated, so no grumbles please. That's all in the guidance notes.
Best regards, John
Posted 26/01/2011 - 18:15
Link
John, I just think it's rude to take down a thread like that without a quick 'thanks' or something.
I do appologise for getting the wrong idea - and I'm very pleased it served it's purpose.
This whole leads to deals section is being policed far to heavily - if an item is no longer available; surely someone can just post that's it's now gone on the thread itself. Is'nt this being over-engineered?
I do appologise for getting the wrong idea - and I'm very pleased it served it's purpose.
This whole leads to deals section is being policed far to heavily - if an item is no longer available; surely someone can just post that's it's now gone on the thread itself. Is'nt this being over-engineered?
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.


1969 posts
17 years
Chester
It's now been removed without explanation.
Then last week another offer I thought it would be good to mention on the forum had it's title changed to reflect a completely different offer. Again, nothing was mentioned to me at all at the time, despite it being confusing to other members what the deal was actually about in the end: Moderator intervention was unecessary and caused problems.
Have courtesy and manners evaporated from the moderators on this Forum? If I did something wrong PLEASE TELL ME. However I have looked at the guidelines on the links to deals section, and find no obvious reason why it has been taken down.
I'm seriously considering moving to a different forum as I really object to being treated in this way.
If you are considering taking down a forum members thread, surely a basic requirement is sending them a PM to advise of the situation, so that they might be able to address the situation without the need for it to be taken down.
I resent being treated like a mushroom here.
My website (Hadfield Photography)
Pentax Gallery Artist page:link
Flickr Photostream: link