Quote from: hilariousandco on Today at 04:41:14 PM

I didn't remove them but there's a few reports against you there for off topic posts.

Thanks for the reply. Aren’t “off-topic” reports for WO supposed to be marked as bad by the forum moderators?

Quote from: nullius on Today at 01:55:10 PM

Quote from: The “Report to moderator” page for any Wall Observer post

Special Wall Observer rules: bitcointalk.org moderators do not moderate the Wall Observer thread for multi-posting (except obvious spam), trolling, or on-topicness. Do not use this form to report those violations; instead, contact the thread owner. Reports of other rule violations are OK here.

I ask because I do try in good faith to stay within the forum rules. (And if I were to object to a rule in principle, then I would take it up in Meta in an appropriate manner, instead of just violating it—either that, or go get my own forum. This being a private forum, as I remarked in OP hereby.)

Quote from: friends1980 on Today at 03:00:16 PM

The line between WO and Serious Discussion has been quite thin for weeks (and probably from the very beginning, but I've not been active long enough to be able to know with certainty).

Although I had occasionally lurked there before, and some others there are quite serious, it was JayJuanGee’s serious discussion that first attracted me actively to post in WO. He is a legend of the forum’s great Wall—to the extent that some people apparently think that he should be walled up there. ;-)

Quote from: khaled0111 on April 09, 2020, 02:41:32 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on April 09, 2020, 02:06:42 AM

Bitcoin Forum > Economy > Economics > Speculation > Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
drive safe

Blame the wordy-man for attracting another wordy-man! Cheesy

Quote from: friends1980 on Today at 03:00:16 PM

I think nullius' posts are a category of their own and maybe Serious Discussion > Ivory Tower > Nullius' Dungeon might be a solution to avoid having his posts deleted from the WO in the future. Cool

Thanks. Quotable. ;-)

Quote from: bitserve on Today at 02:15:15 PM

I (YMMV) would try not to make a big deal of it. While we do, indeed, have "special rules" in the WO that gives us some flexibility... the context in which that exception was granted is also important.

Although your points in the rest of your post are well taken, I should highlight again the context of what was deleted here: Three serious posts. One specifically about a Bitcoin issue. One about thought control. And one about censorship on Big Tech social media (and by the way, please also consider the time it took me to craft that post—which I do not want to say).

If I were to knock off-the-cuff some funny remark about someone else’s post of a woman in a bikini, and a moderator were to delete it, then I would disagree with that—but do you suppose that I would even take the time to make a Meta thread such as this one? (Again, I do not want to say...)

Quote from: bitserve on Today at 02:15:15 PM

Still I would not make a big deal if one (or several) of my off-topic/shitposts were to be deleted unless the occurrence of it suggested some sort of focused discrimination/censorship.

Although I do not want to speculate on that hereby, it is an unavoidable reality that I am widely disliked.

Quote from: bitserve on Today at 02:15:15 PM

Infofront could go and start removing ALL offtopic posts if he wanted to, as that would be in compliance even with the "special rules".

Indeed. If he were to do that, then I would fire off some scathing remarks about how he ruined WO, and then I would fuck off. But that is not hereby the issue.

infofront has, in my opinion, kept the Wall Observer what it is. A huge amount of stuff is thereby posted which I dislike; infofront does not delete it, and he should not. I will admit that I like his WO policy better than what Lauda’s probably would have been, had she won his position when she was a candidate; Lauda was an excellent staff member, but I think that she would have been too heavy-handed for the Wall Observer.

Quote from: suchmoon on Today at 02:39:22 PM

Also there is literally a board named "Serious Discussion". That's where serious discussion can go without being subject to the uncertainty of a special excempt self-mod thread.

Arguing against my expectation that I can safely post serious discussion outside of the forum named Serious Discussion—are you serious!? Roll Eyes

I don’t know why anybody takes you so seriously. You are not an administrator, you are not staff, you are not even very smart—well, are are exceptionally skilled at winning popularity contests. You may guess how much weight I accord to popular opinion. Anyway, I do not accept Bitcointalk SV (Suchmoon’s Vision). I am “excempt” from your “rules”.

Quote from: suchmoon on Today at 02:39:22 PM

Maybe nullius should stop fucking around with the post titles... seems like a dumb thing to do when you're posting in the one thread that allows bending a few rules. A mod may have made a mistake here but I wouldn't rush to blame them if the post title signals "I'm derailing this thread".

To your idiotic calumny, which you state in the third person only because you are too much of a thin-skinned coward to address me straight to my face, I will simply quote myself:

Quote from: nullius on Today at 04:21:43 PM

Why I Retitle

I have always retitled posts when I thought that was appropriate. That has never brought any complaints in Development & Technical Discussion, which in my opinion is the most serious forum (yes, more serious than “Serious Discussion”). It has never caused complaints in Bitcoin Discussion, either—n.b. that that link is to me retitling on my own topic, which I assuredly did not wish to “derail”.

Although my retitling of posts is sometimes hostile, that only occurs if the post itself is hostile to OP. As aforementioned, I not infrequently retitle posts in my own threads—and in others’ threads, I oft receive merit from the topic starter on a retitled post. N.b. that that last link is to a post where I rewrote Lauda’s topic title—and Lauda merited me! I have even retitled my posts in the (strictly self-moderated, very authoritarian) Cult of Lauda thread—just in case there was any remaining doubt about “derailing”, or any intention thereof.

My post titles have sometimes been accorded praise in the titles of replies. Other than a few prior not-quite-complaining remarks in WO, the only place where it has brought complaints was in Reputation—from petty-minded nitwits with personal grudges against me, who were searching for an excuse to nitpick. —Now, what was that about suchmoon?

Besides aesthetics, one of the reasons why I often (but not always) set custom post titles is that I use my received merit list as a navigational aid. Indeed, all of the links in the preceding paragraphs were rapidly found just now by hitting Ctrl-F, and typing in keywords that I remembered. I do this almost every day, usually multiple times per day; my most memorable posts often receive merit, and have memorable topic titles, so... Compare the Last of the V8s received merit list, which is more formidable than mine, but—opaque. (I have explained this before somewhere, in PMs and/or publicly; alas, I don’t know where, and I don’t have a handy navigational aid for finding it.)

I like to keep things organized. Properly labelled. For the same reason, because WO is special, I retitle my WO posts with a “[WO]” marker. Where I think it’s appropriate, outside WO, I sometimes retain portions of the original topic title—sometimes not; I determine that by the overall context, whether I agree or disagree with the OP (and even whether I am the OP).