[Humphrey Hacker]

I would have said a sensible starting point on it should really be whether there is something that can be discussed about the individual along with the opening post. If someone is noteworthy enough in pres circles that there is a good opening discussion that can be attached around them immediately then it seems to me to be a good topic, as discussion is what the forum is actually for. If it's just copy/pasting a link to a major news site article reporting 'Joe Bloggs has passed away' without adding any discussion on the other hand I'd question the point as everyone is just as capable of reading the same news websites!

You make a valid point. A while ago the actress Louise Fletcher died. She played Kai Winn in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. I made a post about her death and open it with something along the lines of:

"I don't know whether this is suitable"

The post was accepted and was viewed but it never developed beyond that. I deleted the post the following day.

[Neil Jones]

Yeah I think the problem with your Louise Fletcher post on a UK based presentation forum may have been she is (or was) primarily an American actress who appeared almost exclusively in American media (Star Trek Deep Space Nine, she appeared in 14 of the 176 episodes made of that so it wasn't even a high profile/regular role - an average of two episodes a season).

The only real link to the UK for Fletcher is her brief appearance in the American adaption of Shameless, and even that's precariously tenacious at best.

[W. Knight]

You make a valid point. A while ago the actress Louise Fletcher died. She played Kai Winn in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. I made a post about her death and open it with something along the lines of:

"I don't know whether this is suitable"

The post was accepted and was viewed but it never developed beyond that. I deleted the post the following day.

Posts like that are more akward when the current PC seems to be not allowing authors to delete their threads after a certain amount of time, leading to a number of 'zombie threads' floating around without responses.

Side note: Interested about globe button beneath your reply! How can I set one up?

[Humphrey Hacker]

It would be better if PC gave authors a specific amount of time in which they could delete threads say 24 hours. Presentation is not a "one size fits all" niche and certainly isn't confined to one country's perspectives hence the Fletcher post. Also I daresay there are a considerable amount of Star Trek fans on here including your truly.

I've never seen any episode of "Shameless" either the UK or US version so I didn't know Fletcher was in it.

Finally and at the risk if reading like a prat @W.Knight..."globe button"?

[Neil Jones]

Side note: Interested about globe button beneath your reply! How can I set one up?

Edit your profile and plonk something in where it says "Your Website URL".

[W. Knight]

Edit your profile and plonk something in where it says "Your Website URL".

That's the one - Cheers Neil!

[Brekkie]

Think you've been a bit overzealous in the BBC News thread on the "no mocks allowed" rules considering they were barely discussed and from a couple of days ago. A reminder of the rules is one thing but absolutely no need to delete posts which didn't disrupt the flow of the thread too. Indeed I think sometimes the mods are too quick to delete entire posts when a gentle reminder of the rules would be sufficient.


And whilst I get why the rule is in place and you don't want random mocks filling up the threads I think in the context of the current discussion of BBC News graphics a bit of common sense should apply - seems people would be allowed to make lengthy posts saying what they think the graphics should look like but would get their post deleted if they posted an image to illustrate what they mean.

[Affogato]

Think you've been a bit overzealous in the BBC News thread on the "no mocks allowed" rules considering they were barely discussed and from a couple of days ago.  A reminder of the rules is one thing but absolutely no need to delete posts which didn't disrupt the flow of the thread too.  Indeed I think sometimes the mods are too quick to delete entire posts when a gentle reminder of the rules would be sufficient. 


And whilst I get why the rule is in place and you don't want random mocks filling up the threads I think in the context of the current discussion of BBC News graphics a bit of common sense should apply - seems people would be allowed to make lengthy posts saying what they think tge graphics should look like but would get their post deleted if they posted an image to illustrate what they mean.

I'll have to respectfully disagree on "overzealous", Brekkie. This is an argument often thrown back at us when we enforce our rules.

We've always been clear about our policy regarding mocks. There have been repeated attempts to shoehorn mocks into conversations. And often these start with "I know mocks aren't allowed here..." - as was the case here.

Making exceptions or turning a blind eye in one instance opens the door.

That said, we've been very flexible with a lot of our rules over the year we've been online.  But mocks/recreations is content that we are adamant we don't want to see creeping on to the forum.

[Brekkie]

Will agree to disagree. Overall this place is superbly moderated - just think from experience deleting posts should always be a last resort.

[AaronLancs]

Can I ask a pertinent question?

What was the reasoning of not bringing a "Mock Designs / The Gallery" board into this place? As it would have kept stuff like what has occurred in the BBC News thread into one dedicated board.

Sorry to be a pain and ask.