I find no real motive for this but to silence people who disagree with them, or have conflicting views. — Count Radetzky von Radetz

The motive is always to ensure quality.

A motive that effectively shuts out potential new philosophers. It is amusing that the most active people on here have over 1000 posts. Maybe you should rethink your strategem.

It is amusing that the most active people on here have over 1000 posts. — Count Radetzky von Radetz

Surely it's a truism that the most active posters have the most posts?

In the interest of transparency, this is the OP that was deleted a few times:

We all know that Matthew made many parallels when writing his Gospel about the Old Testament. But there are a few specific parts where Moses is specifically mentioned.

That's the entire post. The reason it was deleted wasn't because the ideas contained within were intolerable somehow, or anything against you personally, it was because as an OP it falls short in a few ways which are set out on the site guidelines thread. Firstly, the thread purported to be about a serious issue, and so is moderated in accord with this guideline:

3) Context matters:

The amount of leeway you get on the above depends to a degree on where you post and what the topic under discussion is. You're likely to have more freedom in the Shoutbox or in discussions in the Lounge, for example, than in the philosophical discussions.

so it has to meet a higher standard than things in the less philosophical subforums. Also, the remainder of the guidelines are:

a) Genuinely interested in the topic you've begun and are willing to engage those who engage you.

b) Able to write a thoughtful OP of reasonable length that illustrates this interest, and to provide arguments for any position you intend to advocate.

c) Capable of writing a decent title that accurately and concisely describes the content of your OP.

d) Starting an original topic, i.e. a similar discussion is not already active.

(No bumps allowed. If you want to attract replies, think of a better way).

We can tick (a), you seem interested. (b), not so much, you did not illustrate any idea clearly or advance any argument unambiguously in your post. (c) seemed fine. (d) also fine.

Try to put yourself in your readers' shoes. Do you understand the following:

We all know that Debord made many parallels when writing his Society for the SI. But there are a few specific parts where corporatism is specifically mentioned.

I doubt it. If you are unsure how to write a good starting post for a thread, I advise checking out a few topics to get a feel for what is minimally expected.

To tell you the truth, I still don't understand his new thread :lol:

To my mind it's asking to discuss times in the bible where Matthew compared Jesus to Moses and a comparison of the two as mythical figures; and possibly the significance of that analogy for Christianity. But I do agree it is still written unclearly, and the topic @Count Radetzky von Radetz wishes to speak about isn't described very well.

Yeah, but a discussion needs some background. Why are we worried about Matthew comparing Jesus to Moses? Why is that even important? A discussion needs more background framing, so that it can be understood why the issue is being discussed, and what direction the conversation is aimed in.

Otherwise, we might as well start conversations about the color of the sky :s

I deleted your most recent attempt Count. Seems I'm the only mod on and active. I'm quoting your OP here so you can work on it some more before broaching the discussion again:

We all know that Matthew made many parallels when writing his Gospel about the Old Testament. But there are a few specific parts where Moses is specifically mentioned. I would like to know the opinions of people on this forum about the different times Matthew had drawn a similarity between Moses and Jesus. For example; Jesus refined on Moses' law (Ten Commandments) during the Sermon on the Mount.

The reason I chose to delete it was because being on the borderline of intelligibility isn't sufficiently intelligible for an opening post.

Otherwise, we might as well start conversations about the color of the sky :s — Agustino

What’s wrong with that?

What’s wrong with that? — CuddlyHedgehog

It's not a quality conversation, and it doesn't have clear aims, so there is almost no potential for it even to become a quality conversation.

It's okay to start a conversation about the color of the sky if you want to discuss some philosophical issue related to epistemology (for example - I imagine Banno would be someone who would do this), but it's not okay to do so without adequately framing the discussion, such that participants can understand the aim of the conversation and the topic under discussion.

There's no automatic notification system for alerting posters of these changes. That's a software issue. And we don't require such notification of mods, or at least it's discretionary, as it could be considered an unreasonable addition to the workload, and might even discourage moderation, which is the last thing we want.

Anyway, I don't see what opinions you've expressed that we would want to suppress. Part of the problem is that you've barely expressed anything. That's not an issue exclusive to you, and we don't catch all of these, but you've seen the guidelines now, so please make a bit more effort. I'm sure that single short paragraph is not the best you can do.

It's not a quality conversation — Agustino

Says Professor Agustino.

Otherwise, we might as well start conversations about the color of the sky — Agustino

What’s wrong with that? — CuddlyHedgehog

It's not a quality conversation, and it doesn't have clear aims, so there is almost no potential for it even to become a quality conversation. — Agustino

Unless @Banno asks it, in which case it inexplicably reaches 100 pages.

Unless Banno asks it, in which case it inexplicably reaches 100 pages. — Michael

for example - I imagine Banno would be someone who would do this — Agustino

:rofl: I already said that.

Heh. I stopped reading after I found a paragraph to reply to.

Heh. I stopped reading after I found a paragraph to reply to. — Michael

That is not a surprise :rofl:

I thought Count Radetzky supported authoritarianism and crushed revolutions. You clearly seem to be leading a revolution this time.

Contrary to the beliefs on many members of this website, people who value freethinking and discussion, the admins seem to be quite the opposite. Multiple posts of mine have been deleted before I was even notified why, and I am not surprised if there are some which have been deleted without my current knowledge. Due to this website being of a large size, it is only rational to assume it has also happened to others without their knowledge either. I find no real motive for this but to silence people who disagree with them, or have conflicting views. — Count Radetzky von Radetz

There have been a lot of discussions about how the site is moderated. Personally, I'm generally satisfied. I think things have improved significantly recently. It does seem to me that a quick PM telling someone their discussion has been deleted and maybe why is a reasonable request. The argument that's too much trouble is unconvincing. If two minutes is too much time, then don't delete the post.

On the other hand, as some of the moderators have pointed out on this thread; it is frustrating, annoying, and inconsiderate to start a discussion without putting some effort of your own into the original post.

Maybe their new to philosophy and just getting into the swing of things? :confused: sometimes people need a bit of practise making a couple of fumbles before they get the hang of it. — Mr Phil O'Sophy

Agreed.

So, you didn't read the guidelines?

We all know that Matthew made many parallels when writing his Gospel about the Old Testament. But there are a few specific parts where Moses is specifically mentioned.

That's the entire post. — fdrake

Lol.

I will use my tyrannical post modern devouring mother archetype powers to suggest that you read them at some point.

Oh, sorry. Carry on then. :D

?

I'm pretty sure my post was deleted. I made a post asking what peope's race/ethnicity was, got deleted without warning.

political correctness to the extreme. It’s apparently a racist crime to ask someone what their ethnicity is.