Clarification please

[Hullygully]

So I come back to find that you have deleted my thread asking why my Santa thread was deleted.

Of course it was a thread about a thread, it was asking a question about the thread.

Wtf else is one supposed to do?

I put it in site stuff.

It was also a really nice friendly thread full of poetry and laughs. Why why why why was it deleted? What the hell is going on there?

Secondly, if one wants to talk about something, and that something has been deleted purely owing to others mischief, does that mean that one is never to talk about that subject again??

How mad is that?

@Maryz

I've been on two long threads over te past couple of days which have been real bunfights.

There are posters telling out and out lies. Scary lies that could seriously damage vulnerable people. Lies that they have repeated even after it has been proven by links to court judgements that they are lies.

Those threads are still there.

The posters are continuing to lie - and link to blogs that are complete fabrications.

Maybe mnhq should re-prioritise.

This is about Father Christmas ffs, it's hardly a matter of life and death. Let us talk about it if we want to.

Have you reported them Maryz?

Rebecca.

I still want to know this:

And could you explain why a thread on SITE STUFF asking why a thread was deleted = "a thread about a thread?"

And EXACTLY HOW ELSE IS ONE SUPPOSED TO ASK THAT QUESTION?

Not really, Exit - any apology with the conditional "if" in it can do one, frankly.

@Hullygully

I wasn't responded to at all. I got a standard email that was erroneous and then nothing.

No it doesn't clarify anything, you've said exactly the same thing.

And I still want to know this:

And could you explain why a thread on SITE STUFF asking why a thread was deleted = "a thread about a thread?"

And EXACTLY HOW ELSE IS ONE SUPPOSED TO ASK THAT QUESTION?

Hully, If a thread - even one with a clear question in the title, goes on to talk about the same issues as in the first removed thread - then it is considered a thread about a thread.

Our error was not posting a response to your question on that second thread before it was removed - we should have been more transparent and for that I can only apologise.

It didn't talk about them. People mentioned them once or twice, but mostly it was other stuff.

That is ridiculous. And NOT something I've seen before.

Also, is no one ever allowed to talk about the existence of santa or not again?

Because that will be a thread about a thread, won't it?

The guidelines don't say "you can't have a thread about a thread".

They say "If a thread is deleted, please resist the temptation to start a new one repeating and rehashing everything that has been deleted."

So you can't delete a thread that doesn't repeat or rehash stuff from a deleted thread and then just shrug and point at the guidelines.

I'm a bit scared now.

But you've just said that the TAAT rule isn't absolute. You can't even maintain a consistent position from one of you on one thread. And you can't understand that is both ridiculous and frustrating?

And UNFAIR and ILLOGICAL

Am I paranoid?

I fear not

You might all go off to form Goldies and leave me here.

"If a thread - even one with a clear question in the title, goes on to talk about the same issues as in the first removed thread - then it is considered a thread about a thread."

So if another thread ever goes on to talk about the issue of "what to say to children about Santa" then it will be considered a thread about a thread? Mumsnet's been going for a good while now; you must have had deleted threads on every subject under the sun, so you'd better get started on deleting all the current threads as I bet most of them are talking about the same issues as have come up in deleted threads.

There's a difference between "repeating and rehashing" and "talking about the same issues". Surely, surely you can see that?

You're too thick to come, you don't even understand why santa is going to destroy the world

Sometimes the indefensible is best served with just a yeah soz, hands up, that was a mistake, rather than equivocation

I know that sometimes the mods get a wide-on for deleting certain people - I once had a hilariously unintentional email from MNHQ that confirmed this. NB - there is a difference between "reply" and "forward".

So probably not that paranoid, Hully.

Indeed MaryZ , that kind of scaremongering is serious.

Censoring a thread asking why a Santa thread was deleted should not be a priority .

I know I know, bruxeur

Exit, I've been whittling about you , that looks like the sort of thing that causes psychological scarring for owners as well as the dog, so quite understand if you don't want to say xx

StNicholas?

What's a wide-on