Suggestion: Delete thread when member's pull images?

[amonline]

I've been known to be pretty vocal about my anger when wasting time opening a thread only to see the OP has pulled their images. My problem was I always voiced it elsewhere. This time, I'm bringing it here as the mods suggest.

Just this morning, I saw where this has happened again in the People section (it usually happens near daily in many sections) and another member voiced their anger as well. While I've been razzed in the past for voicing the "why'd you waste my time" response, I've seen countless other members respond the same way over the years.

Sure, it's only a few moments, but it adds up - especially if you continue looking through the thread for re-posts only to find none in the end.

This is a regular occurence here in all the forums. The main reason I see is when members get touchy about feedback they receive.

Long story/suggestion short... wouldn't it be nice if members were required to delete their thread if they choose to delete their images? (or, shall we say, cop an attitude?) Or optionally, moderators could just delete the thread. On rare occasions, when there has been good info posted within the thread, mods could choose to lock it instead.

Just a thought/suggestion.

[Pete]

I agree that it's a shame when people remove their shots from the posts they put up, it makes the subsequent discussion fairly meaningless. The removal can be for many reasons - sometimes, it's an old thread that gets dragged up and the OP has re-arranged their website so the links are broken.

Yes, sometimes this happens because the user has been offended in some way by the critique they've recieved.

In cases like this, can we (as moderators) ask you (the members) to report these threads so that take appropriate action. We can't possibly police all threads for inappropriate posts, or where people have removed their shots from view. If someone has been offended by comment to such an extent that they remove their photos, we can at least deal with the offending comments in the hope that the OP replaces their shots.

However, we can't see each time this happens, and we can't see adverse comments in the threads unless we happen to see them.

If you need moderator's attention to deal with situations like this, report the thread. We aim do what we can to reach a satisfactory resolution.

[4walls]

I am all for this. I know there are a couple of threads that I started a couple of years
ago that no longer show the original image. For me, this happens because I have moved
my image hosting around a little over the years.

We could have these threads moved to a "holding area" and if the OP does not fix the link
in the image, then it would be deleted after a short waiting period.

Just a suggestion.

[Pete]

There's no need to quarantine old threads, they tend to sink to the bottom of the lists of threads and are rarely looked at again.

[amonline]

Yea, I was generally speaking only of current threads... and mainly threads where someone gets a chip on their should or attitude to pull images because someone hurt their feelings and said it was out of focus or not sharp. :D :rolleyes:

[DDCSD]

Many threads can still be informative, even without the original photos in them. Just today I was studying up on some old threads about setting up remote cameras and I was still well served by the information and links, even without the original images.

I think for cases such as amonline is talking about, maybe locking the thread would be best. Things usually head south when they get to that point. I don't think deleting threads is a very good idea in 99% of cases though. People tend to not like it when their posts magically disappear, no matter the reason.

[tommykjensen]

This is not something we plan to spend a lot of time cleaning up (and members can only delete individual posts not threads). As has been mentioned there are various reasons for missing images.

On occation if a member get into a habbit of posting images one day and pull them the next day we migth do something about it. But in reality those that get into that habbit just turn out to look incredibly stupid to other members. Its not our job to prevent someone from making a fool out of themself.

[amonline]

I agree with parts of things that are being said. I guess the threads I am targeting are those that are like the original example - threads that are only 1-2 days old, have 1-10 replies and then the OP cops an attitude and yanks the images. (I understand about server/image/age relation and those types of things - we can stop talking about those.)

Generally, in these types of threads where members get a chip on their shoulder about something that has been said, there hasn't been time for another member to post anything terrible important in retaining. (and in some rare cases, there might be)

Additionally, threads that fit this description usually have a few to half the posts where members are replying like I am here. This portion of the example simply allows other members to keep egging on and possibly starting additional arguments or off-topic banter.

These reasons are why I suggested that members be able to or required to delete their thread in this type of situation. This thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=608817) is a prime example of what I am speaking about.

The one thing I sort of disagree about with Tommy is the idealism that mods don't have a role to play or should not be involved. This attitude would never improve the problem. If this is perceived as a problem from member's eyes, then I think a remedy should be an option. Avoiding the problem is not going to improve it. However, I'm not saying to rest this on the shoulders of the mods. I'm simply saying that taking a proactive approach will help improve this issue. This can simply be in the manner of a polite post in such threads to encourage that other members not follow suit.

[tommykjensen]

These reasons are why I suggested that members be able to or required to delete their thread in this type of situation. This thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=608817) is a prime example of what I am speaking about.

That is NOT a prime example in my opinon. OP has posted the reason why the photos was deleted and promised to post them again when permission was granted. No need to delete it. If it was we would just have questions asked about why it disappeared. Its much better to leave it with OP's explanation.

I am pretty sure I can say that members will never get permission to delete own threads.

[amonline]

Tommy, I was editing my post while you were typing.

Also, I had not read the latest in that thread. I copied the link from my UserCP - so pardon that I used it as an example. Until 15 hours ago, (I haven't been on since yesterday) it WAS a prime example. ;)

[amonline]

Another winner... http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=610139

I think I'm going to post these here when I see examples of what we're talking about.

[Pete]

Another winner... http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=610139

I think I'm going to post these here when I see examples of what we're talking about.

There's really no need to drag up each and every one that you see. There's also no need at all to bump those threads. If the threads have served their purpose, let them sink.

[amonline]

I was only pointing out an extreme like I mentioned before - threads that are barely a day or so old. I didn't do this to prove any point... more less to document how many like these happen. (when I come across them obviously) I hardly "drug it up"... my post followed another's from just a couple of hours ago... a mod actually.

[Pekka]

If you like to report posts to mods, please do it by using report button http://photography-on-the.net/forum/images/buttons/report.gif. Members may not delete their threads after someone has replied to it.