HOME > Chowhound > Site Talk >

Discussion

Are closed topics being deleted, such as the Sam Fujisaka topic?

  • 50
  • Share

I noticed this about a topic about a blog called "Cooking for Assholes". It is a great site with lots of recipe and restaurant tips, but enough posters decided to make the language an issue that it was closed.

I was looking for the thread and it is nowhere. Not only is it gone on Chowhound, but it is gone everywhere on the web. No cached copy exists.

I figured fine. Despite stated tolerance for profanity, they decided to bow to pressure and deleted the thread sometime after locking it.

HOWEVER, today I was looking for the thread on Site Talk about Sam Fujisaka and it is gone. That was locked as well..

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
Posting Guidelines | FAQs | Feedback
Cancel
  1. The Cooking for Assholes thread is at http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/706100

    The Sam Fujisaka thread is at http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/701461

    11 Replies
    1. re: The Chowhound Team

      Thanks. Seriously, I don't know why I'm not getting search results. I know I'm having some flaky problems with restaurant search which I can not reproduce consistantly. Sometimes the restaurant is found, sometimes not.

      When I couldn't find the first thread using either Chow or Google, I just figured it was deleted. I went to Google because I thought maybe locked topics were being excluded from the search.

      I didn't look on Google as a result for the Sam thread, but I tried using Chow search every which way ... on title, on my name, on sam's name within the topic and ... nada.

      1. re: rworange

        Locked threads are there, but there are no links to them. It's like hitting a meteor with a bullet.

        1. re: Veggo

          At least with the Sam thread we were given advance notice and a suggestion to save it. I just wish when one is locked that they would leave it in place and slowly let it drop down the board as others do when not posted on. I can't see how that would present a problem and it would give us a chance to save something before it's gone for good.

          1. re: c oliver

            That's what happens on the board indexes -- it slowly drops back as people are unable to reply to it.

            The My Threads page was originally designed to alert you to new replies on threads you'd participated on, and showed only a limited number of threads. Given that, including locked threads, which took up one of those few slots but couldn't get any new replies, didn't seem like a good idea. The list has evolved since then, but excluding locked threads seems to have stuck around.

            1. re: Jacquilynne

              Thanks, J. Maybe you could put in a good word for us :)

          2. re: Veggo

            However, both threads were/are eminently Googleable (although you needed to have the terminology "expletive deleted" part of the non Sam Fujisaka thread to find it. See here: http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expI... )

            1. re: Servorg

              i know this is old so maybe it didnt work last year....
              but googling "cooking for assholes chowhound" brought it up first...

              googling whatever title your looking for with chowhound before or after it usually does...
              even your username...

              i dont even use the CH search anymore....just google

        2. re: The Chowhound Team

          The board acted in an utterly uncivilized manner when it unilaterally decided to lock the Sam thread. A person deserves to be remembered as long as people remember and love him.

          1. re: Parigi

            We decided to lock that thread because, as Jacquilynne, Community Manager for Chowhound, posted there more than three months after it was started, "Over the last few months, we've heard from a number of people who find it distressing to see this thread continue to return to the top of their mychow page day after day. While they miss Sam, the constant reminder of his passing is upsetting to them."

            We gave several days notice that thread would be locked before doing so, and it is still available for viewing at the link in the first reply in this thread, above.

            1. re: The Chowhound Team

              Of course it was distressing and should have been distressing. That is known as grieving, you know. So the thread was closed because people were not whooping it up enough for chowhound?

              1. re: Parigi

                Sounds like the thread was closed because people requested it not because the site thought it was sad.

        3. Uh oh. Not again...

          1. Add this to the list:
            http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/802570

            32 Replies
            1. re: Googs

              oh Googs, no offense as that thread was fun but had shot its wad. I would have liked the chance to reply HA! to a few comments, but life goes on.

              now I AM torn on the Sam F. thread, we DO need to move on (sad as that sounds since he was amazing) I don't want to cause people pain, - but that's life, pain. he was such a voice. which raises the question: is it fair to push this over to his FB memorial page since he posted here far more? I don't know.

              1. re: hill food

                And
                http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/807658

                1. re: Googs

                  And one about a woman dealing with a friend/colleague who has some radical ideas about how others should feed their children. That one's gone altogether.

                  1. re: Googs

                    Yeah, the food snob thread. I thought that one was pretty interesting but it seems to have vanished completely.

                  2. re: Googs

                    I found the logic for locking the Food Intolerance thread a puzzling one-- or disingenuous, perhaps. The mods said they locked it because the OP 'bowed out' but they have left zombie threads because there is possible interest in the topic that could remain beyond the initial query.
                    The reason for locking is more likely the fraught nature of the topic, and the way these discussions can lead to flaming and the like, even if the OP bowed out. (A shame, really, in that case, although it became clear that what the OP wanted was support and not suggestions; the way she framed her predicament let most hounds know exactly why she was having such trouble educating people about her daughter's diet.)

                    1. re: Lizard

                      thank you! this inconsistency bugged me too. i always thought that the philosophy was that ops could start threads, but then the threads belonged to the community and the op was discouraged from arbitrarily directing how the discussion ensued. i guess now ops "own" threads and can direct the mods to lock them, even if folks are still discussing on topic and respectfully. i don't care for this change in policy. very weak.

                      http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/807658

                      1. re: soupkitten

                        There's no change in policy, and the OP didn't actually ask us to lock that thread. We were already considering locking it when she declared she was done, so that settled the decision for us.

                        It was going badly and requiring a significant amount of moderation to keep people from insulting each other -- as most of those types of threads do. Perhaps we could have explained it differently, but the decision was in keeping with the many other threads we lock on NAF.

                        1. re: The Chowhound Team

                          But what happened to the "vanished" thread about the snobby co-worker?

                          1. re: acgold7

                            The thread was removed, and we emailed an explanation to the original poster.

                          2. re: The Chowhound Team

                            hmm. it's your site, i suppose. really though, some events on the site can appear quite baffling from our end :) even those of us who have been around for long enough that we *think* we get the "rules"-- then we get all confused and discombobulated.

                            oh well, still your site, and i guess what do i expect on the naf board-- here today, gone tomorrow.

                            1. re: soupkitten

                              Sorry, I closed that thread myself, and I didn't mean to confuse anybody with my explanation. The OP bowing out of the thread was the last straw, so that's what I cited when I locked it, but it was going to be locked pretty quickly regardless, because it was a mess, and we'd had to delete a lot of mean-spirited posts from it already.

                              1. re: Jacquilynne

                                tyvm for responding Jacquilynne. i do believe you when you say it was a mess. okay then.

                                1. re: soupkitten

                                  "mess"? it was a train wreck.

                                  1. re: hill food

                                    but made for good reading killing time at work.....

                                    1. re: srsone

                                      srs: oh yeah it was a hoot to read. just ugly.

                                      1. re: hill food

                                        "interesting" reading is part of the reason i lurk on reddit also...

                                2. re: Jacquilynne

                                  I, personally, would have enjoyed working towards a more positive outcome on both of those threads. When people come to us for help, we should be finding ways to guide them gently, not hammer them into position. I think both threads just needed a hard steer towards that destination.

                                  1. re: Googs

                                    " When people come to us for help, we should be finding ways to guide them gently, not hammer them into position."

                                    That would be great. Sometimes when there's a pile on, people dig in and become defensive. There are some posters who are great with your idea of guiding gently and I'm always impressed with it. There are also times when someone wants support and not suggestions, as Lizard said, and it's good to know when it's time to back off because anything further just inflames the issue and falls on deaf ears.

                                    I was surprised for the reason given that the topic was closed--that the OP bowed out but Jacquilynn's explanation here makes sense. I thought the purpose of leaving threads open wasn't for the OP but for any future posters who might be interested/have similar questions. There are many long threads where the OP disappears, whether it's Home Cooking, regional boards, NAF, etc. that are still informative. Many mean spirited posts, though, is another issue.

                                    1. re: chowser

                                      "it's good to know when it's time to back off because anything further just inflames the issue and falls on deaf ears"

                                      would that more lived (posted) by that.

                            2. re: soupkitten

                              @soupkitten: I just read through that CH thread you posted** and I must say that the posters were correct in taking on the OP, as well as some other responders. In addition, I found it shocking (although not surprising) at the lack of chemical knowledge shown by various posters, especially those who insisted that a chemical produced "naturally" was completely different from that produced [or "cultured" (???)] in the lab. Citric acid was an example of this disconnect. Etc etc.

                              **(after fixing it due to the prefix for the paragraph return that is currently bugging every hyperlink preceded by a paragraph return on the forum)

                              1. re: huiray

                                "**(after fixing it due to the prefix for the paragraph return that is currently bugging every hyperlink preceded by a paragraph return on the forum)"

                                I am linking the thread in question here, just to do a little experiment for my own amusement to see if the link comes up corrupted or not.

                                http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/807658

                                ADD: Yep - corrupted. Damn technology! ;-D>

                                1. re: Servorg

                                  oh. looks like it's gone.

                                  1. re: soupkitten

                                    I'm still getting a 404 file not found screen when I click on the link. Maybe it's working off an old cache.../

                                    1. re: Servorg

                                      From my end one clicks on the link, let the new window/tab open with the error message, then go to the url line of the browser which shows http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/%3Cb... and manually delete the front end of it ( http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/%3Cb... ) to leave just the actual url ( http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/807658 ) then hit Return/Enter.

                                      See http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/809822 .
                                      [Note that the urls above appear as intended because I wrote the post so as not to have a paragraph return immediately preceding each url; as well as inserting a blank space on either end of the urls in parentheses otherwise those urls "pickup" the parentheses and then read as http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/(htt... and so on.

                                      1. re: huiray

                                        What I did was correct the URL (as you did) from the first 404 message I received, so that the link worked, and then copied that good address and pasted it in to my message to soupkitten (just to test the hypothesis). As I noted in my post, the link I tested then came up corrupted (with a 404 file not found message appearing).

                                        1. re: huiray

                                          There's some bug in Chow server that is adding an extra 'http:...<br/>' at the start of links.

                                          1. re: paulj

                                            Yes, I know. See http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/809822 .

                                  2. re: huiray

                                    We're not reposting here so that we can continue the debates being closed by the moderators. That would be disrespectful of their decision. It's just cataloguing.

                                    1. re: Googs

                                      Is it not ok to disrespect the mods' decision?

                                      1. re: Parigi

                                        I interpret Googs to say 'yes discuss the issues, but this thread is not the time or place to bring up and continue the closed conversations'. otherwise dis 'em all you want (within reason) question their intelligence and judgement as you wish. or if you have a valid and cogent argument why something should be unlocked, then e-mail and explain your case, just don't re-start it here.

                                        1. re: hill food

                                          That's exactly it, hill food. Thank you. I'd hate for this post to go away,

                                          1. re: Googs

                                            No worries. I did not mean to restart that old thread and y'all are correct that it shouldn't be restarted here. I just had never read it before and merely made some comments about it without thinking too much about it.

                        2. Oh dear, I had no idea of his passing. Guess I haven't been on here as much with my house full of kids these days. His posts and food wisdom will be greatly missed!

                          3 Replies
                          1. re: DishDelish

                            DD: they remain, you just have to look.

                            1. re: hill food

                              I mean and fresh wisdom on new posts. Thanks Hill food. :)

                              1. re: DishDelish

                                yeah we all miss him