Why have you deleted a thread?

[tldr]

AIBU thread got full, you deleted the follow up as a TAAT. Why?

This one:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2804088-AIBU-to-wish-that-people-who-tell-me-I-am-wrong-to-dismiss-their-conspiracy-theories-would-be-able-to-tell-me-why

I suspected HQ might alter the title to make it clear it was part 2 rather than TAAT. I was surprised it was deleted instead.

Deletion is a bit harsh given op was mid convo with someone.

And by 'bit' I mean a complete overreaction, obviously.

Hi there,

We removed this as we felt it was quite goady. It was directed towards a particular poster (which we don't really feel is in the spirit) in a way that we felt was inflammatory and not really conducive to discussion.

It wasn't at all goady. Read the last twenty posts of the previous thread. It was a continuation of an interesting and useful discussion.

You are of course entitled to run your site any way you wish.

But it is a shame that I am simply deleted as 'goady' in all the circumstances of the discussion that preceded this.

Your site will be all the poorer if you will not permit genuine, albeit heated debate.

But so long as you can get clicks for your penis beakers, I don't suppose you care that much.

O and btw - you want to delete me? Please just do it without the patronising message. Thanks.

So why was the continuation thread deleted. The deletion message doesn't make sense. Firstly it said that it was a TAAT. Well other posters seem quite clear it wasn't, it was a continuation of a previously full thread.
Secondly you say it was goady, but the people on the thread saw it as heated debate.

There are plenty of nasty and clearly goady threads on MN that seem to be allowed to stay.

Shame if the only treads that get to stay are the quirky and banal. MN needs to also be a place for serious, yes and sometimes heated discussion or why bother.

Evidently the conspiracy goes very deep and MNHQ are involved

I do think the context is necessary here, and that deletion was so fast that I wonder whether HQ could have had time to gather the context by reading the latter half of the first thread? I'm sure that sometimes there are so many reports coming in that a quick desicion has to be made as there is no time for anything else, but this is a very valuable discussion and it would be good to be able to continue it. Or read along as others with more knowledge continue it, for lurkers on it like me!

I recently started a thread saying "where is x thread"? As I wanted to post on it and ouldnt find it. Iirc someone kindly pointed me to it. Then it was deleted as a taat!

Oh, MNHQ, I do think this was a mistake. Please consider reinstating the thread (with an amended title, if you must).

Have you read the first thread? It's worth doing so, imo, not least to read how Spero has been threatened for challenging those banging the forced-adoption drum.

Not for the first time, either. An MP (who was subsequently banned by MNHQ), outed her in the national press a couple of years ago, because she challenged the bilge he was spouting on here and elsewhere.

This was thread one I am now quite keen to find out why the continuation thread was deleted.

Hi again folks. Yes, we agree it wasn't a TAAT in the 'traditional' sense. Perhaps we should have made that clear in the deletion message. If the original post had simply said that it was a continuation of the previous thread, we'd have had no concerns. But it felt a little bit combative to summon a poster from the previous thread in an OP and ask for a response. It seemed as though the new thread was all about that particular disagreement on the previous one and not simply a continuation of the discussion, if you see what we mean? And we had a few reports from other posters who felt it was inflammatory.

We're very happy for there to be a second thread now that first one is full, so do feel free to start another, but we would ask that it's started as a simple continuation of the original, rather than anything else.

MNHQ please reinstate the continuation thread. Spero really knows her stuff and is one of the best posters on mumsnet for those of us interested in the subject.

I feel deleting this thread was a big mistake MNHQ. You need work at keeping more of the intelligent, reasoned posters like Spero who can provoke interesting debate.

Otherwise you might as well bring on the sparkly glitter tickers.

Please reinstate the thread.

It did say it was started when the previous thread was full, and was continuing one convo/theme from it that was still active when the limit was reached.

And if anyone was goady! it wasn't spero

Please reinstate the old thread.

we would ask that it's started as a simple continuation of the original, rather than anything else.

But if I have understood, it WAS started as a continuation and not as anything else.

It really seems as if whoever decided to delete this thread has made a mistake. Can it please be reinstated?

I read the op and it was obvious the thread was a continuation. A strange decision to delete it.

Thread in AIBU that might be worth reading in conjunction with this one:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2804170-AIBU-to-finally-leave-mumsnet?msgid=65535739#65535739

If anyone was goading anyone it was the other way round. Doesn't being a long term poster who helps people ALL THE FUCKING TIME and never gets arse despite massive provocation count for anything?

I can't put it any better the pp but I really think you reinstate the thread hq.

It wasn't goady, simply a continuation of the conversation on the previous thread.

You are driving away your intelligent members ha.

Not the best decision you've ever made.

And she can't just start another because she linked to that one at the end of thread one. Unless you can edit the link?

Poor fucking show MN. I agree re the sparkly tickers...

yy conserve
Might be interesting for MNHQ to check just who it was that reported the thread too - we all know that certain groups have 'targeted' Spero.

Anyway, she has said on her thread that she may start a continuation thread, instead of flouncing