Ludwig: "We need messages on threads where posts have been deleted ..."

Obviously, I agree. But they can detract with the flow of the posts. When Wayne Smith carpet bombed the place a week or two ago (he was probably the Judy Spence impersonator as well), someone (Dewi?) replaced his posts with big red notices. It looked ick.

I would like to see it done, but it has to be unobtrusive as possible. A one line note perhaps, like this in a neutral colour (not Red!):

Post by xxxx, Monday, 7 July 2008 4:33:09 PM, deleted - defamatory.

It would be nice to have links to xxxx's page and to a longer explanation of why the post was deleted embedded in there, possibly with a copy of the message sent to the xxxx telling him he has been a naughty boy.

For audibility's sake it would be good to show every deleted post that way, but if there is a lot of SPAM then again it would detract from the look of the place. It won't be easy to get the balance right. Out of all the things I suggested, this one will definitely take the most work to implement. I see it an the most important, but probably the least likely to happen.

There seem to be quite a few professional programmers here, and I am sure if OLO asked they would be happy to do the work for free. But nothing ever comes for free of course. Technically doing this is easy - programmers have organised themselves to work collaboratively for free over large time and space distances for years via the Open Source movement and have changed the face of the software world as a consequence. Whats more they have done it on a massive scale, well beyond what OLO needs here. But I suspect changing to that model it would be a bit of a cultural shock to programmers at OLO, and they are the ones who would have to make it work.

“I suspect that is up to the submitters. I certainly don't want to see stuff added by OLO editors that wasn't submitted just to make the site look prettier.”

Totally up to the article authors I presume. I wouldn’t want anything inserted into any article I wrote without knowing about it and approving of it before publication. But OLO could easily encourage writers to add a photo or two, that’s all.

“Post by xxxx, Monday, 7 July 2008 4:33:09 PM, deleted - defamatory.”

Yes. This is all that’s needed to indicate that post has been deleted. A similar message should be added at the bottom of posts that get partly deleted.

A couple more things. Both have been mentioned on this thread but let’s say it again anyway…..

I’m finding it very unfortunate indeed that there is no response from Graham or Susan here, on this thread which the administrators are surely monitoring and which is now three and a half weeks old.

A whole host of good ideas and some gently constructive criticism has been presented here by people who really support OLO and want to see it become steadily more effective and well patronised. But there is no support coming back.

Secondly, I think that article writers should be required or at least strongly requested by our administrator to monitor comments to their own articles and respond, particularly when a response is directly requested by a poster. Some do but many don't.

I am very disappointed that Professor Peter Curson hasn’t responded to my direct request here; http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=7671#119494. There have been many other occasions on which I have tried to communicate directly with authors on OLO, without success.

Nice as it would be to have authors respond, OLO can't force the issue. Handing out their email addresses would just drive some authors away. I would of liked to see Peter Curson response to your question as well, but I suspect in some ways you got it - he doesn't know, or at least doesn't feel comfortable in putting a precise figure on it.

On a different issue, the times on the General Article discussions are wrong. My most recent one is timestamped at around 04:30 PM. Bit it was submitted at around 7:00 PM, and OK'ed at 10:30 PM. Not that is matters - I am just curious as to how it happens.

“I would of liked to see Peter Curson response to your question as well, but I suspect in some ways you got it - he doesn't know, or at least doesn't feel comfortable in putting a precise figure on it.”

I think it is much more likely that he just hasn’t seen my questions, because he hasn’t bothered to read any of the responses to his article. But we just don’t know.

I find it quite extraordinary that an author wouldn’t come into the discussion that results from their article if they are specifically requested to do so or if there are well-considered views that need to be refuted or supported.

The lack of response from people like Professor Curson gives the strong impression that they consider the discussion to be below them or that they have much more important things to do or that OLO is really just a tiny part of their enormously important lives and that they are only contributing articles to win brownie points or add to their list of publications, or all of the above. It gives this impression but of course we have no idea if it is at all true.

I think it also knocks the stuffing out of the veracity of their arguments, if they can’t see fit to come back and defend their viewpoints or develop the theme. Any author can throw an article together pretty quickly if there is no pressure on them to ever defend it or show that they really do have a bit of in-depth knowledge of the subject.

Non-responses from article writers really don’t go down well at all. They drag the quality of this forum down.

After reading some of the more recent comments on this thread it seems to me some of you guys are placing way to much importance on this website. It's really just an "opinion" website, that most people don't know about and don't care about. I say that merely to put the website in perspective, not as a put down.

Australia has over 20 million people, yet if you look at the forum you'll see most topics get a mere handful of replies (5 to 20 or so), usually made by people making many, many repeat postings. Therefore, there's only a very tiny number of "active" users. Whether the people here like it or not, the truth is the site is but a mere needle in a huge internet haystack.

And like all "opinion" sites, it attracts the usual collection of freaks, nut cases, extremists, wheelbarrow pushers and others who simply have too much time on their hands and who live their lives through internet chat/opinion rooms.

Let's get things in perspective, and understand the true relevance of this website. That doesn't mean, "don't do it", it means just understand it for what it is.