You guys, I don't want to run NQB off as a result of this. People can report or request deletion of whatever they want. The big issue is that the mods actually DID IT.
I am here. I didn't see the OP but I point my pitchfork in the direction of the mod. "Accident" or not.
You guys, I don't want to run NQB off as a result of this. People can report or request deletion of whatever they want. The big issue is that the mods actually DID IT.
I am here. I didn't see the OP but I point my pitchfork in the direction of the mod. "Accident" or not.
These accidents happen way too frequently with flex. You'd think after the outrage over the deletion of the makeup thread, you'd be more careful of what link you were clicking.
2. YES. WE WERE. VERY MUCH SO. NQB said PDQ - no one quoted. NQB asked pugz to delete - pugz deleted. It was all very tame and respectful.
Until NQB somehow successfully deleted my thread and then told me to "respect her decision." Which, it shouldn't have BEEN "her decision" in the first place!
Oh man I don't know if it was here or on the nest. But NQB was calling a reporter at a local paper (like, Small Town Daily or something) and the reporter didn't call back right away so she posted about the reporter being a dirty pirate hooker. Something like that.
I find both NQB and flex's after-the-fact reactions the most infuriating thing about all this.
"Calm down and respect my feelings, seeya later."
"La di da, just a slip of the finger, seeya later."
When they both know damn well that pretty big gbcn protocols have been violated and how people react to that.
Exactly.
I am recalling from last night that NQB jumped the gun almost immediately (possibly even before the person she was talking about was named? Not sure on that, but it was quick) and requested the "post" be deleted. I thought she meant her own posts because opaque tights are not offensive (sometimes they are though, depending on the design). And in this thread, instead of her admitting she overreacted and apologizing, she's kinda doing the non-apology of "I'm sorry the thread had to be deleted." Because no, it didn't have to be deleted and for some reason, she's just not understanding why people are upset.
And now, "opaque tights" is our new inside MMM joke. Just in time for the 2015 superlatives!
Why am I still reading this. I should not have deleted the thread. I'm sorry. I've been deleting a bunch of FB friends due to offensive Syria posts and I'm just really touchy right now. I won't be checking this post. My boss is on vacation and I'm supervising the bureau until Xmas. Goodbye
AND ANOTHER THING! don't tell me to calm down lololol
The difference between this and cokedick is that in cokedickgate other people were bringing up drama. The people involved stayed almost completely silent and were (I guess? I think?) reporting/deleting stuff to run damage control on stuff they never brought up in the first place.
NQB STARTED this whole thing!!! She's the one who brought it up in the first place! AND kept harping on it and dangling the carrot! lol. You can't delete other people's threads because YOU started something and then changed your mind! I mean, you shouldn't be able to do it anyway, but especially in that case!
But wasn't cokedick brought up by one of the people initially? Or else how did the rest of the board know about it?
It's probably going to be a slow day so I'm ready and willing to rehash all sorts of other drama too!
Why am I still reading this. I should not have deleted the thread. I'm sorry. I've been deleting a bunch of FB friends due to offensive Syria posts and I'm just really touchy right now. I won't be checking this post. My boss is on vacation and I'm supervising the bureau until Xmas. Goodbye
To be clear, YOU didn't delete the thread. A mod named flex did.
I do think it was a little out of line that you requested it to be deleted, but I agree with jeaniebueller than the main offense is a mod paying absolutely zero attention to said request and going ahead with it despite no terms being violated and you not being the OP.
Pugz posted a vent about the article topic and deleted her own post very quickly. So then she showed up in this's deleted thread and called out cloudbee (I am guessing since she deleted that part at NQB's request by time I got to it).
my vent the other night was deleted because it was about a family member sending me a link to the article all "i know you are having trouble getting pregnant and have taken anti-depressants so you should totally read this, love you bye" in his typical insensitive way and I try not to leave that kind of stuff out there. I have no problem talking about the article/study itself
My tagging of CloudBee last night was because 1) I hate vague posting and everyone trying to guess who it is, let's just get to the end of the story where the name ALWAYS comes out and skip the in between and 2) CloudBee is a good friend of mine and I feel confident in saying she either accidentally liked the article or liked it for other reasons as someone stated above. I know her to not to be a person that judges people that take anti-depressants
1. I refrain from posting medical articles all the time because people are sensitive here.
2. I always accidentally like things on fb
I can see why  you do that, and I think it's ridiculous that it has come to that.  Grown, intelligent women should not be so scared to read of a scientific article saying something they don't like (ie, I'm not talking about a situation where someone says they have always thought you were a shitty person).
I understand that some topics are more sensitive than others. However I don't think that should stop us from discussing them. For some it seems like science is only good when it says what you want it to say.
First props to @nqb for confessing she requested the delete. That is good. Second - the article. Rewind to 1970, thalidomide. Women took it because the doctors said it was safe. It was not safe. Nobody blames those parents. Nobody!!!! If this information can help us in the future, shouldn't we be open to it? I just hope this information is reliable because on the other hand, I would hate for women to be afraid to take drugs they need during pregnancy due to risks that aren't substantiated. Which is also why posting the article is good. You get the information. We dissect it. We show other people it's a bunch of garbage and then the moms here can take antidepressants without feeling guilt. I hope this isn't offensive. But liking or posting an article is not insensitive. It's the news. It's out there. pugz situation - offensive.
ML was ragging on us for letting the drama die so quickly, but as soon as flex said it was an accident they seemed to accept it and move on. Who's turning a blind eye now?!
I'm so confused. We are smart women. Why are we treating an article published in one of the top medical journals as if it was an article self-published on antivaxx.com or something?
Okay I'm not leaving. I'm available if anyone wants to keep posting about this. I regret deleting the thread. I also regret letting FB agitate me so much. I appreciate those who have reached out. This board and the people here are important to me but sometimes I need to self edit.
I got roped into a PTA volunteer task where I'm basically sitting in a classroom listening to the same presentation 3x in a row solely for the ten minute breaks where I ask the presenter if they need anything.
So thanks for having drama, MMM! I'd be super bored otherwise. Please, carry on. For the good of us all.
I am not the only totally loving the irony of what pugz just posted on fb, right?
I don't think it's ironic! Should we have this conversation? I mean something like 10% of pregnant women are on ADs. It's something that touches a lot of women. I also read a study that having children two years apart leads to an increase in autism. It's hard for me as a parent to read stuff like that so I appreciate the link questing the research conclusions.
I did not post the article, I posted an article that explains why the motivations of the researcher have been called into question. It is in response to all the click bait articles that were going around when the study came out
It's a totally separate set of steps to delete a thread vs. a post.
So I call BS.
FWIW, on H&F where I'm a mod, I only delete posts where I'm personally asked via message, and 100% of the time this has been because it contained personal info from the beginning and the first post said "I will ask for this to be deleted."