Sooooo the argument about whether the community should be able to post anon needs to be hidden from view?  I thought that there would never be a reason to post anything that you wouldn't want to put your name to, so surely it shouldn't be a problem for each of us to see whats being said.

Pumpkins, the discussion that was in black was unrelated to this discussion. I've already said this before. 

Anon is not the same as private. Although I admit that the redacted parts went a bit longer than needed.

Spike, you missed Pumpkins' point. :p

She is saying that if there is no need for anonymity, then why are you hiding behind redacted text. :)

Because we were having a private PC discussion about a party I'm throwing this weekend that I'm not inviting the rest of the site to. I didn't to make anyone feel bad for not getting the invite, but thanks. 

Our names aren't attached to our posts when posting? Redacted and having no name to your post are two different things I'm afraid.

Damn! I didn't get invited either. :(

Thank you Aidan.  If PC needs to have priate talks in a public forum, I feel my right to privacy should be equally respected.

Aidan might not have been invited, but PC-Adrian was. 

And yeah also what Cassi said. We're accountable. 

Only to eachother.  Not to the general public.  Im pretty sure you arent allowed to share what is redacted, so, no, you arent accountable.  I disagree with the premise that they are all that different at all.  You say I can privately contact helpdesk with my questions when I am incog, I say you can privately contact eachother with your unrelated posts.

We don't have a place elsewhere to talk, Pumpkins. And you have your privacy plenty. You can send MMs, and create back alley threads. That's all you need and it is no different from what we were just dong except that you knew we were speaking, but not to you. Big deal. 

It would appear a number of people have got on their high horse regarding redacted text.

People will moan if we talk in private about matters because there is no visibility we are considering things. We however feel the need to have private conversations about issues.

Redacted text is our format for doing this quite simple really, the players have visibility we are thinking about a subject and we have our privacy.

End of.

I can't speak to this absolutely anymore, but I can only assume that the redacted text now is similar to what it was when I was on the PC. In which case, it usually pertained to matters that either went beyond the scope of the thread at hand or related directly to something that someone else on the PC said that needed to be aired privately rather than for public consumption. It never needed to be viewed by the players.

That being said and understanding why the redaction is occasionally required, I can understand why "a number of people have got on their high horse". If you can't, read the thread from your playing accounts without the benefit of knowing what anyone else is saying through the redaction. I would suggest in particular the multiple posts without any other redaction from one member of the PC which when coupled with their responses, appear to be little more than intentional abuse of the facility.

The PC are meant to represent the players. Given that, I don't understand why there is the need for the superior attitudes displayed in this thread.

Part of the replies were responding to the thread, part of it was responding to the discussion in redaction. Sorry if there was a feeling of superiority towards any of the players, but when we are being questioned, potentially in an offensive fashion, in the thread and in other forms of communication, this should be expected. One of the rules for users when dealing with PC is respect, and Donbot, your post was respectful. However, there were others who were not so... tame. The only way to handle people when they're overstepping into things that either aren't their business or when they're saying things that are accusatory as PC is through our words. The redacted text was citing things that were not for general consumption and sadly it occured during an arguement itself about redaction. 

Redacted text is a feature that we do not abuse. You know how it is used first hand, and in this thread we used it when we had to. We should not have to explain it further, but I assure you no offense or abuse occured in those redacted statements. If we seemed superior in our attitudes, or more specifically, if I did, then it was because I was being questioned for redacted text in a manner that was out of line by other means of communication. This sort of thing should not occur, and it just goes further to prove why I do not trust people to have the ability to be anonymous because they can say things without having to have to stand up for their words after they've said it. They can be offensive and can step away. These things I'm referring to are not the kind of things that are punishable by admin standards, but empty critiquing can make for others believing in fallacy. Need I refer to Kuku's tactics?

I feel this has now been effectively put to bed.

Can we get back on to the topic in question now from the posts onwards. Which for the record was not the discussion of redacted text.

The topic has moved to the PC Forum El Nino.