Naomi, That would be fine should anyone have cared to reply to a deletion. The blog posting was existing for a time. I would not call that a hiccup. I'd call it a misinformed scan and a delete.
However, why should there be a re-posting of content when the moderator does not identify the issue with any blog yet simply deletes content? Should the blogger resort to guessing at what the moderator mistakenly thought was inappropriate content and re-post? Would it then possibly be the case a different moderator views the material and makes yet a different decision?
Wouldn't you think it would be much better to confer and state the objection along with a reasonable response time? That way the blogger has time to respond and at least there is a documentation trail for correction.
Certainly you are communicating well here but are you suggesting that usually your team will respond to a blog issue rather than arbitrarily delete? If so, then the situation experienced was an anomaly.
Are you talking about the thread titled "DALI Lighting Control - What is it and why do you want it?"
If you are, then I'm curious how you can say it's "a misinformed scan and a delete" when you posted this (emphasis added):
"Ryan, your welcome.
Someone at this site moved this to products. DALI is a protocol so certainly the article did not belong here as a product. Therefore, I removed the content rather than permit the gross misrepresentation."
So, if someone on our end did delete the post, then I'll look into it and see what happened. But, if what happened is that you did, indeed, delete the post yourself, I'd like to politely ask you to not accuse the moderators of actions that they didn't take.
© 1995-2012 Trade Press Media Group, Inc.
Building Operating ManagementMaintenance SolutionsArticle DirectoryTopics
Contact UsPoliciesManage Email