Posted: 3/14/16 at 2:31pm
Could you explain why PRS's request for deletion was not honored or why Margo's posts stand?
Posted: 3/14/16 at 2:39pm
We removed a few posts earlier in the thread by a couple of people that attacked AC126748 the person, as opposed to those that had a difference of opinion on Twitter etiquette. If there's any *particular* posts that you think we missed, or should take another look at, I'm more than happy to both do so, and to hear your opinion on them. Please PM me.
We had another user ask to have their account removed, which is why it was suspended. We're exploring the technical and other implications involved with a full removal, which is on the To Do list and we will keep you posted.
Posted: 3/14/16 at 3:11pm
Growly, Rob and I have spoken privately, and I am happy with the action he's taken regarding Margo's posts. He has removed the posts made towards me that were personal attacks. The other posts that remain are easily refuted by my posts, and I am fine with them remaining. They show that Margo was being less than truthful and that I stood up for myself and presented the truth. Perhaps, as Rob suggested to me (I hope, Rob, that you don't mind me paraphrasing you), it can act as a learning opportunity.
Updated On: 3/14/16 at 03:11 PM
Posted: 3/14/16 at 3:20pm
Thank you, Rob and AC, for your responses. AC, if you are satisfied with Rob’s actions in moderating Margo, then I trust them to have been well-executed.
Just to follow up on Namo and PRS’s suspensions so that I’m understanding fully -- other members asked their accounts to be removed and/or suspended, and so they were?
Posted: 3/14/16 at 3:39pm
Thanks AC, and good paraphrasing. We're not looking to censor, or to remove any sort of legitimate debate, or criticism. And even illegitimate debates that someone in this vibrant community is able to address and clarify, I think serves better than us being delete happy.
We do not have a function in place for someone seeking to remove their account entirely, making the only current method to be a lifetime 'suspension'. Other methods will be explored, and any other account specific questions that you'd have, please PM me.
Posted: 3/14/16 at 4:27pm
Is this same drama going on at the All that Chat message boards?
Posted: 3/14/16 at 4:56pm
I am VERY happy to see one person go because of continuous personal attacks but even happier to see Jane2 re-appear [don't know why, perhaps it was his/her wisdom of Hedwig [which I HATED [that word can be so very cathartic] .
SL........x[for Jane2-please stay].
Posted: 3/14/16 at 4:57pm
Anakela said: "So this is not her Facebook?"
Nope. This is her Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MsLeaSalonga/
And this is her Twitter: https://twitter.com/MsLeaSalonga
Her Twitter and Facebook are linked to each other. If she tweets, it goes on Facebook, if she posts on Facebook, it tweets the message. Notice how they are both verified with the standard "verified" check mark.
I actually reported the fake one today, I urge others to do the same. She's had fakers in the past two (pretending to be her as well as her young daughter). Don't understand people's sick desire to pretend to be a celebrity.
Lea's recent tweet for proof that all other accounts are fake.
Posted: 3/14/16 at 5:11pm
musicaltheatreman2 said: "Is this same drama going on at the All that Chat message boards? "
Not really.
http://www.talkinbroadway.com/allthatchat_new/d.php?id=2324955
Posted: 3/14/16 at 5:20pm
But datalounge is talkin'...
https://www.datalounge.com/thread/16612951-theatre-gossip-206-message-board-bullying-like-nerds-doesn-t-belong-on-broadway-edition
Someone should tweet Patti and ask her why her campaign didn't include removing that from the Internet.
Posted: 3/14/16 at 5:20pm
The reaction on this board is understandably greater than on ATC. Patti called out this board (and Rob) by name. She didn't mention ATC at all, so it's really just a passing discussion for them.
the few posts on ATC on this situation are not particularly kind.
Posted: 3/14/16 at 5:25pm
She said in her radio interview she didn't call out ATC because all it is is a message board (she was corrected), whereas BWW is a full fledged Broadway and theater website of which the message boards are only a part.
Posted: 3/14/16 at 5:38pm
Jordan Catalano said: "But datalounge is talkin'...
https://www.datalounge.com/thread/16612951-theatre-gossip-206-message-board-bullying-like-nerds-doesn-t-belong-on-broadway-edition
Someone should tweet Patti and ask her why her campaign didn't include removing that from the Internet.
"
Wow, way worse...
Posted: 3/14/16 at 5:43pm
Datalounge - - - now THAT'S a cesspool! They are truly ripping her a new one over at Datalounge.
The posts about her over there make the ones over here read like a Disney Princess fairy tale.
Updated On: 3/14/16 at 05:43 PM
Posted: 3/14/16 at 6:03pm
But just remember -WE'RE the bad people.
Posted: 3/14/16 at 6:21pm
"But just remember -WE'RE the bad people."
Please. As many of you well know, Datalounge makes no bones what they are: "Serving up this steaming pile of...gossip ...and pointless b!tchery" for some near twenty years, It's part of their name. Theater is only one of their hundreds of topics, which include "Men presenting their holes" and..well, you get the idea. You go there, you're a fool if you don't know what you're in for .
To compare Datalounge to BWW, a board dedicated solely to theater (and one that young teens post on) is really grasping at straws.
sta: Datalounge has been none too kind to BWW in that same thread. In fact, there has been not a single supportive post that I've read. I love Datalounge. Any time I feel evil, I head over there. It's practically a prerequisite to post there.
Updated On: 3/14/16 at 06:21 PM
Posted: 3/14/16 at 6:25pm
"what did Steven Pasquale say that was so nasty?"
Nothing. He said "If it fills u up in any way to snark on theater chat boards? Then please never speak to any of us. Ever. Like ever." Now people will NEVER go see his shows again. Oh, the drammmmma. He was clearly talking about the people that are mean and nasty on here and tear actors down. It's really funny and honestly, most tourists who pay money to see shows will never look at this board, so he hasn't lost much support anyways. He then responded to a rude remark by being defensive back. So again, he did nothing wrong.
"I was thinking it'll be nicer. He was the nastiest and rudest person on here."
I agree 1000%
Updated On: 3/14/16 at 06:25 PM
Posted: 3/14/16 at 6:38pm
"We removed a few posts earlier in the thread by a couple of people that attacked AC126748 the person, as opposed to those that had a difference of opinion on Twitter etiquette"
That's fine by me, but I wasn't attacking anyone. I looked at your rules and I never violated any of them. I understand and respect your decision. To think anyone would think I "attacked" anyone with what I said, is just ridiculous considering past users patterns of abuse. This includes never ending harassment, immediately calling new users old users and abusing them until they left, wishing them death upon other posters, using derogatory, horrifying names, threatening their lives, undermining and mocking their opinions, etc. The list goes on. It's INCREDIBLE that I would be put in a category like that. I never once abused anyone or said anything that was not true. I respect and understand your decisions Rob, and thank you for keeping my honest posts and simple conversation with another poster.
Updated On: 3/14/16 at 06:38 PM
Posted: 3/14/16 at 6:42pm
Margo - you're not (by me at least) being put into a category of anything remotely as horrific as the examples you list below. (And needless to say, but I'll say it, if there's examples of those that we haven't caught, please PM). There was a couple of posts, and I don't think just by you, but I'm not at my desk right now (shh!) that were attacking the poster using terms that weren't needed, as compared to your much more eloquent and subsequent posts that brought up some real (and interest) issues about Twitter etiquette.
For those posts, and your understanding of the rest, I thank you much!
Posted: 3/14/16 at 7:11pm
I understand Rob's need to be diplomatic. If I was sitting in his chair I would probably feel the same way. I am no longer engaging directly with Margo, at least not on this thread, but I think my prior posts speak for themselves. Any legitimate conversation on "Twitter etiquette" to me went out the window when she deliberately distorted the facts of my conversation with Pasquale to serve her narrative. I invite anyone to go back and read them.
Posted: 3/14/16 at 9:17pm
We will not be retroactively punishing anyone, and are starting fresh as far as our new moderation policy is concerned.
And, anyone on our moderator team that's also posting, you'll see this new bold 'Team BWW' designation under the photo <--- that way.
Any other questions about individual issues, you can PM me at anytime ... with specifics. Thx.
Updated On: 3/14/16 at 09:17 PM
Posted: 3/14/16 at 10:16pm
this is exactly what people are afraid of... you respond to my post but still delete it and i receive no message or notice explaining the decision behind that action. but OK.
Posted: 3/14/16 at 11:00pm
"Is light snark acceptable but medium snark not? Not to patti, we all know it's not to patti, and she's why we're all here." If you honestly don't understand the point she's making, you may well be part of the problem.
When I first joined this board, it didn’t take long to realize that there are many immature kids, with little insight or knowledge of the industry but who like to pontificate like pros nonetheless. They are often mean spirited and snarky, speaking in absolutes based on nothing. They also like to pick petty squabbles with others in posts having nothing to do with the thread’s subject. So I’ve learned to keep my eye on the left margin and when one of those names appears, I sail right by. There are plenty of posters who are extremely smart and enlightened and I regularly enjoy hearing what they have to say, No need to bother with the nonsense.
Updated On: 3/15/16 at 11:00 PM
