Meldy! Meldy! Meldy!

M..ouse wrote (see)

PhilPub, that's perfect. Thank you.

Kk - but how do we know if Zhang Wee is male or female?

Pam pam pammmmmmm!!!

Damn, you got me! I always was crap at Cluedo

Zhang Wee has been here being unfunny long before the idea of spam-mods was discussed.

Badly Drawn Bloke wrote (see)

In fact Stevie, you may want to edit what you put. I'm sure you weren't saying "well, he sounds a bit foreign so deserves what he gets", but that's what it sounds like.

No need to edit anything, bearing in mind the guy picked the username to sound like one of the 1000s of spammers.

But then, i tend to find I usually disagree with most things you ever post, so why change now

Maybe selling stuff on here would be my forte...

PhilPub wrote (see)

Badly Drawn Bloke wrote (see)

In fact Stevie, you may want to edit what you put. I'm sure you weren't saying "well, he sounds a bit foreign so deserves what he gets", but that's what it sounds like.

That thought really didn't occur to me at all.  The way I read it, Stevie G was merely saying that someone posted something which looked exactly like the sort of spam we've been receiving recently, even down to the username.  It just happens that 99% of it is coming from China.

As stated above, I don't think such a post deserves to be deleted, but it might explain the mistake. 

No, what explains the mistake is that I have Asperger's Syndrome (a form of autism) so I have difficulty processing the linguistic subtleties that people use.  I saw it, wasn't sure, so left it.  When I saw it again, linked to the title, I thought that it was genuine which is why I marked it as spam.

Ah, so the villain of the piece is ...

... Jeepers!

I shall have to spank you now.

(and agreed with others, the fake ID is no longer funny but I just thought I'd point out it needn't have been deleted for being spam)

Jeepers, I wouldn't be paranoid about the Asperger's  diagnosis. Linguistic subtleties are virtually impossible to tell in the instantaneous written word. I enjoy a bit of lively banter but am also very good at getting myself into trouble. Comments meant in jest at 23:30 with a glass or two inside seem to be quite rude at 0800 and sober.

I wonder if it's possible to Caz one of my own posts after the event?
Even self report to a moderator with a grovelling apology?
At the moment we can only edit a post if we haven't posted again. As it is I tend to run 3 threads concurrently if I'm bored.

I think we need to move on  

Stevie - I'm shocked

Not sure that we do need to move on yet...

I saw the thread title and thought 'spam', but the actual post was something along the lines of 'it's free on the BBC, without adverts, innit?'... no links, no advertising, nothing, so fairly obvious after a cursory inspection that it wasn't spam, but a joke.

I also thought it was moderately amusing. (DYSWIDT?)

I'm not happy about having hair-trigger deletion; I'm really not. Poor briefing of appointed mods by RW, poor execution by Jeepers (though kudos for owning up to it)

I am not Zhang Wee or anyone even remotely similar.

Crash Hamster wrote (see)

 

I'm not happy about having hair-trigger deletion; I'm really not. Poor briefing of appointed mods by RW,

 

 

It wasn't poor briefing - their instructions were very clear.  The mistake was mine in marking as spam a thread that wasn't.

Crash Hamster wrote (see)

.

 

 poor execution by Jeepers (though kudos for owning up to it)

.

 

I'm sorry that you think that it was poor execution.

Crash Hamster wrote (see)

 

 so fairly obvious after a cursory inspection that it wasn't spam, but a joke.

 

And that's the point that I'm trying to make, it might have been obvious to you, but it wasn't to me, I didn't realise that it was a joke.  If I had, then I wouldn't have done anything.

I'm not paranoid about being an Aspie, and hope that it doesn't come across that way, I'm just trying to explain why I thought that it was spam when everyone else seems able to see that it wasn't.

B wrote (see)

Crikey, it's no big loss to the forum is it? I am not surprised someone thought it was spam, it looked like spam, in fact it was designed to look like spam. If whoever posted it wants to do it again they can ...

Well, if they do, I'll now know to leave it be.

B wrote (see)

Crikey, it's no big loss to the forum is it?

Yes, I think that it is. Once you start allowing forumites to acquiesce to the deletion of someone else's post because the content is 'no great loss', you might as well scrap the forum altogether; the original post was certainly not Voltaire-style important, but the principle of the deletion being the start of erosion of free speech certainly is.

I'm also not convinced that RW's instructions could have been that clear; if they'd defined 'spam' as 'something containing a link to another site, a malicious URL or similar' there would have been no prospect of Jeepers making a mistake; there was no link in the removed post.

It's the thin end of the wedge, I tell you

A weekend without spam..  

Result...!

Well done to the new super-mods...  

Yep, what he said ... I was just pointing out a minor glitch, not out to start a fight.

Forum's a much better place now.

Oh good. A Meldy thread!
Now I know where to come for shoe shopping advice!