Fed up on the constant deleting threads because OP asks

the identifying whine is a nonsense, just an excuse, like magic words to get a thread pulled

And yet I've asked for a thread to be deleted and it wasn't "because people spent time on it" (telling me I shouldn't think about where to go on holiday based on where we might not stick out as a family and that this makes me a Bad Parent).

I don’t read the DM, so I assume they have to state it comes from MN? I just get the impression that they (DM) writes whole articles based on threads but you could be forgiven for thinking that they sourced the story

Yeah, sometimes it's annoying in the midst of a thread for it just to go poof, but then again what am I getting if it hangs around on t'interweb? It's not like I sit there at the weekend reading back through my posts.

Threads sticking around can be useful to people in the future but primarily they're supposed to be useful to the OP at the time, so whatevs, they want it gone, poof!

It does sting a bit though at the time.

And 'bunfight' usually means 'OP isn't getting the answers they want and is arguing the toss with anyone who disagrees whilst doing silly thank you everyone who has PMed me posts'

I report actual bunfights but too often I think it's people not liking being challenged.

It's on an open forum. People on here talk about other things they have read on other sites. Including the Mail.

@Believeitornot The DM is allowed to - it's a public forum. Nothing to stop them.

I do wonder why some people post at times - they don't get the "oh poor you" response and then ask for deletion. I don't always think the OP gets a battering, but more of a "why the hell are you putting up with this" when they clearly have no intention of making any changes.

Nowt such queer as folk.

What’s the legal basis for allowing the daily mail to steal threads from here? I

I don't agree that it is necessarily more snowflakey. The nature of threads has changed. They can just become a pile on. The same unhelpful response repeated ad nauseam. Almost invariably there are some useful posts in between, but the overwhelming feeling is a battering of the OP. I would like to see a few more "Peace and Love" style early interventions too.

I don’t mind so much when the OP has asked to have a thread deleted but you only need someone to claim a thread is racist, sexist, disability etc for the thread to be deleted or edited.

There seems little interest in actually seeing whether a post/thread actually is one of the above, merely that someone thinks it so. HQ normally use ‘bunfight’ as an excuse.

It is a shame that real debate is completely stifled and MN has turned so ‘snowflakey’.

I don't mind it when someone realises something might be outing.

What annoys me is when people start threads, don't get what they want so wnat it pulling.

I agree that it is silly. In most cases, and on many other forums, the individual posts are removed but the responses remain. It's an Internet forum, not a personalised agony aunt service, so even though the OP started the thread, the subsequent exchanges between posters is interesting and can be valuable. It might also be interesting for someone in a similar position, even if they didn't post the OP themselves. It's disrespectful to those who give of their own time and experience to offer advice.

If you want to make a rule that the OP controls the thread, make that a rule. If you claim to be a discussion forum, don't go around wholesale deleting threads.

*wouldnt

Threads don't serve to help just the OP, I have draw countless help and wise advice from threads I didn't start.

If I knew a thread was going to be pulled I would bother posting on it in the first place.

But they've had the advice. If the thread goes, the advice has still been given. Does it have to stand in perpetuity?

Well, yes. I've been here a while... I know the deletion policy used to be different.
And I remember posting years ago about this, because MN had said previously that they wouldn't delete just because the OP didn't like the way the thread had Fine, and it seemed they were doing that, etc.
But I've changed my view. Some threads make for horribly uncomfortable reading. I can completely understand why MN have changed their deletion policy. And, as ypu say, if people don't like it...

We're teaching our kids to be careful about identifiable information that they put online...

There's some irony in the fact that so many people seem to be incapable of moderating themselves on a parenting website.

why is it so important that the thread stands

^because other posters invest time in it, by reading, replying and giving advice. And then OP has a change of heart and poof, it never happened.

But that has always been the nature of the beast

It has changed a lot. And certainly not for the better.

So many responders are down right vile. I don't see why someone should have to put up with 300 people telling her she's an idiot etc, etc woth little regard for the person who originally posted.

"why is it so important that the thread stands"

Because that's the norm. (Or at least it was). Your words remain, posts are permanent, unedited. You have to stand by what you said.

If you think you can just get it deleted, th what incentive is there to really think about your post?

If you wanted to belong to a site with a different deletion policy, you could have joined one.

But why?

Even if you've been an utter twit, why is it so important that the thread stands, despite the consequences, or even just the emotional effect on the OP. Just because some other people who are nothing to do with them at all are mildly irked at its disappearance. I don't get it.