Deleted Threads

[ozarkstom]

Forum URL: countryconservatives.proboards.com/

Two threads discussing different aspects of the Covid virus were deleted from my forum.  I can only assume someone at ProBoards thought some comments contained "misinformation".  I'd like an explanation as to how we can discuss this topic without violating someone's sensibilities at ProBoards.

Is discussion of the virus not allowed?  If it is, which expert, and at which time that expert spoke are we allowed to quote?  The only consensus I can see is that the "experts" have no lasting consensus themselves from day to day, week to week.

I've asked this question of ProBoards abuse team twice with no reply.  Perhaps someone here can enlighten me as to ProBoards official stance on the most recent allowed information.

Respectfully,

Ozarks Tom

[harryk]

These are the guidelines we've been using - support.proboards.com/thread/661355/covid-19-global-health-emergency. Don't know if they've been updated since.

Also stress the importance of reliable links/quotes even in a shifting sea of opinions. Established global medical organizations, .gov sites and reliable news outlets should be acceptable, hearsay and speculation not so much. Stay safe.

[Kami]

Jul 29, 2021 18:24:27 GMT -8 ozarkstom said:

Forum URL: countryconservatives.proboards.com/

Two threads discussing different aspects of the Covid virus were deleted from my forum.  I can only assume someone at ProBoards thought some comments contained "misinformation".  I'd like an explanation as to how we can discuss this topic without violating someone's sensibilities at ProBoards.

Is discussion of the virus not allowed?  If it is, which expert, and at which time that expert spoke are we allowed to quote?  The only consensus I can see is that the "experts" have no lasting consensus themselves from day to day, week to week.

I've asked this question of ProBoards abuse team twice with no reply.  Perhaps someone here can enlighten me as to ProBoards official stance on the most recent allowed information.

Respectfully,

Ozarks Tom

Jul 29, 2021 19:41:32 GMT -8 harryk said:

These are the guidelines we've been using - support.proboards.com/thread/661355/covid-19-global-health-emergency. Don't know if they've been updated since.

Also stress the importance of reliable links/quotes even in a shifting sea of opinions. Established global medical organizations, .gov sites and reliable news outlets should be acceptable, hearsay and speculation not so much. Stay safe.

I would add that sites / publications with a less than reputable history (for example, a tabloid magazine known for poorly investigated sensationalist stories) can occasionally also produce correct & informational content; in these cases, it's always best to provide additional sources of a more reputable nature (such as bipartisan scientific publications, official national health sources for your area, and so on) to support the statements in the original publication.

I also feel the need to stress that it is entirely okay and normal for information to change. This is a long-term emergent situation, the likes of which are fairly novel to the scientific community as a whole. As our knowledge changes the more the situation is researched by multiple, varied, international experts, it is entirely healthy and in keeping with the scientific process to adapt recommendations to fit the most current information. To assume that there will be a definitive, solid answer for a heretofore novel situation that caught many organisations off-guard will be a detrimental line of thinking in the months and years to come as we learn more about this disease. A good point of historical reference is how cases of polio were handled in the 1950s, and how health recommendations and treatment changed the more medical and scientific professionals learned about the disease; the history of smallpox and invention of the smallpox vaccine is equally fascinating insight into virology.

For clarity, this is not a support of any one specific line of thinking or discussion, just a general point of scientific process.

I hope this helps! If not, check back during business hours (Mon-Fri, 9AM to 5PM Pacific / -8GMT) for a PB admin's reply. I don't think they can get into much more specifics than we already have, or discuss the details of the removal as they do not have this information, but it would be worth checking in to see if they have any additional advice.

[ozarkstom]

Jul 29, 2021 20:38:24 GMT -8 Kami said:

Jul 29, 2021 18:24:27 GMT -8 ozarkstom said:

Forum URL: countryconservatives.proboards.com/

Two threads discussing different aspects of the Covid virus were deleted from my forum.  I can only assume someone at ProBoards thought some comments contained "misinformation".  I'd like an explanation as to how we can discuss this topic without violating someone's sensibilities at ProBoards.

Is discussion of the virus not allowed?  If it is, which expert, and at which time that expert spoke are we allowed to quote?  The only consensus I can see is that the "experts" have no lasting consensus themselves from day to day, week to week.

I've asked this question of ProBoards abuse team twice with no reply.  Perhaps someone here can enlighten me as to ProBoards official stance on the most recent allowed information.

Respectfully,

Ozarks Tom

Jul 29, 2021 19:41:32 GMT -8 harryk said:

These are the guidelines we've been using - support.proboards.com/thread/661355/covid-19-global-health-emergency. Don't know if they've been updated since.

Also stress the importance of reliable links/quotes even in a shifting sea of opinions. Established global medical organizations, .gov sites and reliable news outlets should be acceptable, hearsay and speculation not so much. Stay safe.

I would add that sites / publications with a less than reputable history (for example, a tabloid magazine known for poorly investigated sensationalist stories) can occasionally also produce correct & informational content; in these cases, it's always best to provide additional sources of a more reputable nature (such as bipartisan scientific publications, official national health sources for your area, and so on) to support the statements in the original publication.

I also feel the need to stress that it is entirely okay and normal for information to change. This is a long-term emergent situation, the likes of which are fairly novel to the scientific community as a whole. As our knowledge changes the more the situation is researched by multiple, varied, international experts, it is entirely healthy and in keeping with the scientific process to adapt recommendations to fit the most current information. To assume that there will be a definitive, solid answer for a heretofore novel situation that caught many organisations off-guard will be a detrimental line of thinking in the months and years to come as we learn more about this disease. A good point of historical reference is how cases of polio were handled in the 1950s, and how health recommendations and treatment changed the more medical and scientific professionals learned about the disease; the history of smallpox and invention of the smallpox vaccine is equally fascinating insight into virology.

For clarity, this is not a support of any one specific line of thinking or discussion, just a general point of scientific process.

I hope this helps! If not, check back during business hours (Mon-Fri, 9AM to 5PM Pacific / -8GMT) for a PB admin's reply. I don't think they can get into much more specifics than we already have, or discuss the details of the removal as they do not have this information, but it would be worth checking in to see if they have any additional advice.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I found nothing in your explanation enlightening me as to what is "information" and what is "misinformation".  Are those arbitrarily determined by someones personal opinion?  Is the entire subject of the virus forbidden unless the quotes are from Dr Fauci and links to the CDC's latest pronouncements?  It's all very confusing.

Country Conservatives is a very small but fairly active site with members from varying backgrounds, including medical, giving their personal opinions and at times linking to articles that may or may not be official dogma.  At times we relate personal experiences with both the disease and the effects of its treatment,  surely those can't be considered "misinformation".  It would seem either the term "misinformation" should either be meticulously defined by TPTB or the entire subject should be forbidden from discussion.  Or, perhaps adults should be allowed to form their own opinions based to whatever information may be available at a given time.

One other thing that I should mention is at least one of the two threads was in a password protected "private" board.  I established that board to allow members to discuss personal things going on in their lives without worry of lurkers or bots being privy to that information.  Was I foolish to think those discussions were indeed private, similar to private messages, or are private messages monitored too?  I confess to not having read all the fine print in TOS. Since telling our members of this situation I've already had one member mention possibly dropping off the site.  Did I mislead our members in telling them the board was private?

I look forward to an Admin explaining further.

[ozarkstom]

I stand corrected, I've found one of the two threads I believed to have been deleted.  Either it was reinstated, or I somehow missed it in my search.

[Kami]

I can't answer the question you're asking vis a vis "misinformation". I am not a PB admin, nor am I part of the abuse team, and I do not have the context you are searching for as far as to why your thread(s?) were removed. All I, as a support helper, am able to provide, are rules of thumb to go by that help folks err on the side of caution. I cannot get more granular to say where a misstep occurred. I had hoped that the things said already in this thread would help provide insight to possibilities as to the removal based on a general "here are good guidelines to follow", and I am sorry that wasn't the case. Hopefully a PB admin can provide you the insight you seek for your specific situation.

I did want to address your question regarding privacy: nothing in your forum is hidden from PB employees with the exception of your members' account passwords. A private forum, a password protected board — these are all user-facing protections. ProBoards employees, as part of the course of their jobs (since they may need to provide technical assistance, investigate reported content, and so on) have super-user access to all forums and all content therein, including a forum's admin panel. That said, it is not a power that is used lightly and PB Staff take care to use these powers only when the situation necessitates it — they do not go around (if anything, simply because there aren't enough of them, but ethically because it's an ability that should be used sparingly) to each forum to babysit. (For additional clarity, guests / lurkers / bots / any regular user you have not provided access to areas to will not be able to access said areas; this is just in reference to PB employees).

PMs, I should further clarify, are not "Private" messages but rather "Personal" messages. Even for the average forum user, there are ways to share messages (adding new participants to a conversation, or forwarding the message chain to another user) that prevent messages from being classified as "private". While forum admins cannot arbitrarily decide to check someone's messages as they do not have direct access, they aren't considered private because they can be shared through options provided within the software. Additionally, all forum content including PMs are subject to the ProBoards Terms of Service ; since forum admins cannot actively monitor PMs, however, they will not be held accountable if members break the TOS via PM, unless the forum admin is found to be actively encouraging prohibited behaviour / content being conducted over PM.

I hope that clears up the issue, and encourage you as an aside to double check the TOS as it is a legally binding contract between yourself and ProBoards that you agreed to adhere to in order to use their service.

[:~:Sarapha:~:]

One other thing that I should mention is at least one of the two threads was in a password protected "private" board. I established that board to allow members to discuss personal things going on in their lives without worry of lurkers or bots being privy to that information. Was I foolish to think those discussions were indeed private, similar to private messages, or are private messages monitored too?

I want to add to on Kami's wonderful reply; nothing on Proboards can be considered "Private", because anything posted is subject to the TOS. PMs between members are also monitored by Proboards head admins in cases of abuse of said TOS. That is not to say the head admins go through and read Personal Messages Willy nilly, but they reserve the right to monitor them for content that goes against the TOS.

At the same time, I would not classify them as "lurkers" or "bots". When you create a Proboards forum and account, you are bound to the terms of service. This is true even if you didn't read the TOS.

[Scott]

First off, I'll apologize in advance that I'm unable to offer any guidance regarding what is acceptable covid information beyond the link that harryk provided above.


However, I do want to clarify a few things:

 ALL forum content must comply with the TOS and our policies. Hidden board, password board, PM, etc., doesn't matter. ALL content on the forum regardless of where it resides must be in compliance.

Two threads discussing different aspects of the Covid virus were deleted from my forum. I can only assume someone at ProBoards thought some comments contained "misinformation".

If there was misinformation on the forum you would be sent a PM by the Abuse Department to remove the content with in 48 hours. It would not just be deleted - unless the PM warning was not heeded.


PM is an initialism for Personal Message, not Private Message, as Kami explained.

PMs between members are also monitored by Proboards head admins in cases of abuse of said TOS.

This is not an accurate statement. Even though the administration of PB has access to personal messages, it is against policy to view anyone's PM's without their express permission.

[moonbeam]

Jul 30, 2021 4:23:13 GMT -8 ozarkstom said:

I stand corrected, I've found one of the two threads I believed to have been deleted.  Either it was reinstated, or I somehow missed it in my search.

Out of curiosity, have you checked your security logs to see if perhaps another staff member moved or deleted it (if anyone else has sufficient privileges to do so)?

[ozarkstom]

Jul 30, 2021 8:14:23 GMT -8 Scott said:

First off, I'll apologize in advance that I'm unable to offer any guidance regarding what is acceptable covid information beyond the link that harryk provided above.


However, I do want to clarify a few things:

 ALL forum content must comply with the TOS and our policies. Hidden board, password board, PM, etc., doesn't matter. ALL content on the forum regardless of where it resides must be in compliance.

Two threads discussing different aspects of the Covid virus were deleted from my forum. I can only assume someone at ProBoards thought some comments contained "misinformation".

If there was misinformation on the forum you would be sent a PM by the Abuse Department to remove the content with in 48 hours. It would not just be deleted - unless the PM warning was not heeded.


PM is an initialism for Personal Message, not Private Message, as Kami explained.

PMs between members are also monitored by Proboards head admins in cases of abuse of said TOS.

This is not an accurate statement. Even though the administration of PB has access to personal messages, it is against policy to view anyone's PM's without their express permission.

Just one more question if you would please.  If ProBoards didn't delete the thread in question, and since I've checked our security logs that show no such activity, is there another entity with the ability to just erase a thread?  I know many hosting services are in one way or another tied to Google.  Could this be what happened to the thread or is there something I'm missing?

[Scott]

ozarkstom, I didn't say PB didn't delete the thread, (as I don't have access to that info), I was just stating that if it was us you should have received a warning PM about removing that content. Was there no PM in your admin inbox?

[Kami]

Jul 30, 2021 12:44:21 GMT -8 Scott said:

ozarkstom , I didn't say PB didn't delete the thread, (as I don't have access to that info), I was just stating that if it was us you should have received a warning PM about removing that content. Was there no PM in your admin inbox?

to add to this: if you have more than one account on the forum (eg: the account that was automatically created for you with the username admin + an administrative-powers account with a custom username), it would only be sent to the one with 'admin' as the username.

[harryk]

Jul 30, 2021 12:58:46 GMT -8 Kami said:

to add to this: if you have more than one account on the forum (eg: the account that was automatically created for you with the username admin + an administrative-powers account with a custom username), it would only be sent to the one with 'admin' as the username.

Just about to ask that question, thanks Kami.

[ozarkstom]

Jul 30, 2021 12:44:21 GMT -8 Scott said:

ozarkstom , I didn't say PB didn't delete the thread, (as I don't have access to that info), I was just stating that if it was us you should have received a warning PM about removing that content. Was there no PM in your admin inbox?

Nope, no warning.  I always log in as admin.  If you don't have access to that info, who does? 

As to my question about Google or some such entity?

[ozarkstom]

I stand corrected.  I made the assumption that since when I log in it shows Ozarks Tom admin that I would get any warnings directed to the site.  I just logged in as just admin only and found a multitude of warnings and notifications I'd never seen going back to our inception.  I've had a couple warnings from the abuse team in the past directed to Ozarks Tom admin and never considered they might be sending them otherwise.

Obviously this whole thread was misdirected, I should have been addressing the abuse team to find out what information was considered "misinformation".  I also saw a few warnings about racist comment, which  makes no sense either.

I'll once again email the abuse team @ [e-mail]  Maybe this time they'll have the courtesy to reply.

Sorry to have bothered you.