Very many posts in that thread were deleted, as the thread had become a literal shitshow. I deleted all offtopic posts (and eentually moved many of them to their own topic). No specific post was targeted there, just anything offtopic.
In fact, the original post she was upset for being “ontopic for poop” but offtopic for the original thread was restored in the poop thread.
And I have spent way too much time dealing with poop over the last 24 hours.
I don’t think @learnedcoward can hear you. 
More seriously though, I think of offtopic comments the way I do about sharing my full and honest opinion of people with them.
I can pretty much feel welcome to share the positive and upbeat parts of my opinions of people (e.g. You’re generally well dressed, I like how timely you are, you have good taste in music, etc…), but if I were to share some less positive things (e.g. I don’t like how late you often are, this music sucks, I think you dress poorly, etc…) then I would be putting myself and that relationship in jeopardy.
If it’s offtopic but adds your positive opinion, i’ve not usually seen it moderated. That also often draws likes. Tangential.
if it’s offtopic and adds your negative opinion, this often does get moderated. This draws all kinds of attention. Self interested.
Thanks for listening.
In a way, you’re dealing with people putting poop where it doesn’t belong.
I think that’s a reasoned approach, and I’m happy to share my philosophy on that, as it’s definitely relevant to how I’ve been moderating.
If you want to take another user to task for their behaviour, I don’t think there’s an easy way to do that “in public” without (even inadvertantly) encouraging brigading (or at least, to the user, the potential perception of such). You are better off talking to them in PM. Like at a party, pull them aside and tell them they’re drunk and need to tone it down, don’t call them out in front of everyone sort of thing.
If instead of just taking issue with their behaviour, you believe someone is acting in bad faith, PM me instead and I’ll address it. I don’t think either of those belong in the original topic because they will, in the end, almost certainly lead to a derail.
Now,
If instead you disagree with the position someone has taken (instead of the person themselves), and it happens to be tangental to the conversation, then by all means - spin off the topic (or PM me to, but seriously, you can all do it, too!), and discuss away. We mutants tend to be lateral thinkers, and I think you’ll find that discussions split off in all sorts of crazy ways as a result of some of what we cover here, and many of those topics deserve their own, dedicated posts themselves.
I hope that’s both a) clear, and b) reasonably sane policy. 
The answer is neither!
Not sure if your making this the first thing one sees when logging back is meant to be corrective or shaming? I was already corrected and don’t do shame well, hope we’re good?
Ahh, see, I call them out in front of everyone. Not for being drunk, but for calling -me- out in front of everyone and then playing victim when they get served the other half of the shit sandwich they brought to the picnic.
I think after a comment or two it’s pretty reasonable to point out that the drunk is shitting in the puchbowl, AGAIN. But I’m coming to realize how many people like the taste and would rather not see whats in the cocktail. I mean, toxic behavior, ITS INTOXICATING.
Maybe we need you need to kick the drunks out the same way those who lose their temper trying to draw -your- attention to ‘the drunks’ are getting kicked out, too often.
Thanks though. I think you do a really great job.
User @Bozobub got 30 days off for following another user from thread to thread harassing them.
Tropo anonymized at user request.
Anonymized monkeyoh at user’s request.
Post deleted from Tillerson thread that was pre-emptively offering to start fights with other users. Might as well delete it before we have to delete other people’s posts in response and deal with all the bad feelings.
A general thought about moderation:
So really if one wants to avoid problems, the best thing to do is create lots of reply comments so only one gets nuked.
Yes. I have to agree to this. It’s annoying from a moderation perspective as well.
The system will yell at someone for multiple posts, but I won’t. 
It is unfun to sort out who quoted the offending comment or the offensive part of the comment vs someone who responded not even realizing the stub thread included vitriol.
The Topics claim not to be threaded, but are threaded in a hidden and bad way rather than anything constructive. Entire threads are disappeared when moderators can’t sort through at detail. Taking time to sort it out also lets others add more comments while we work
Responding only to 1 person per comment is safest, also even if you think you are not responding to a thread with some jackassery in it – if you are writing a very long and effort filled comment it is likely smart to check.
As moderators we try to read an entire thread and pick through the weaving to find just the comments to delete – but frequently there is no time for that and the system makes scorched earth easier.
And @orenwolf thanks for clarifying. I’ll do this from now on
6 posts were split to a new topic: Things you’d like to see in Discourse
Discussion about Discourse features != General Moderation.
Killed two posts in the lightning strike thread telling me i hadn’t updated the updated post to their liking.
@popobawa4u is on vacation for victim blaming (then trying to sea lion about it) then doubling down.
You’re welcome to share skepticism about a claim here, you’re not welcome to disparage potential victims absent facts to the contrary. That tactic is used far to often to silence legitimate issues.
Thanks.
