Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If you click on your own name you go through to a page which gives you the option to click on 'view all posts by MrCheeky'.


Click on this, and scan through until you find the offending post. Click on the headline and you'll go through to the post.


Click on 'edit post' in the bottom right hand corner of your post, and edit as appropriate.


However, this won't necessarily get you off Google I'm afraid. Google 'cache' or save website pages to make it easier for their search engine to provide you with faster results.


This means that changing the forum won't change the saved page in their cache.


There's realistically nothing you can do about this execpt hope that the passage of time de-prioritises the page so it no longer appears on results.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/18718-v/#findComment-459041
Share on other sites

Pace Huguenot's post, Google themselves say here, "The new cached version replaces any previous cached versions of the page." So they're going to have an old version of a changed page only until they next sample it. The Google cache of the EDF Family Discussions Kingsdale thread, for example, now matches the censored version.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/18718-v/#findComment-459169
Share on other sites

On further checking I see that EDF pages contain a 'noarchive' request and that Google honours these. This means that, even if Google do cache a page, they won't make that copy available in the search results. The fact that Google search hits on EDF pages seem not to contain a 'Cached' link goes to confirm that. (Further explanation here.)


So I was wrong in the post above to say I'd seen a Google cached page. Search terms I used, though no longer in the EDF version, do still produce Google hits on the thread. But all that is available from the Google links is the current revised page 1 or, for hits that matched subsequent, now deleted, pages, EDF server's report that the message could not be found. [Added sentence follows:] What I saw in the hit report was a short excerpt (300 characters) from Google's private cache of a deleted page of the forum.


MrCheeky, can you still get a Google EDF hit on your email address? I'm interested in how long they endure. If you do, I think you'll similarly find that the hit report is all you'll see.


Savvy users, btw, tend to use a disposable email address (eg a gmail or yahoo one) in public places where it could be harvested or abused.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/18718-v/#findComment-459217
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Or increase tax.  The freezing of personal allowances is one way, not what I would choose.  On principle I don't care if the rich immigrate.  The main parties could have been more honest before the election.  Reform is deluded.
    • I edited my post because I couldn't be sure we were talking about politicians and I couldn't be bothered to read it all back. But it was off the back of a thread discussing labour councillors, so it went without saying really and I should have left it.  What I said was 'There's something very aggressive about language like that - it's not big and it's not clever. Some of the angry energy that comes from the far left is pretty self-defeating.' (In relation to a labour councillor rather immaturely, in my view, wearing a jumper that read 'fuck the Tories').  But I don't recall saying that "violent rhetoric" is exclusively the domain of the left wing. So I do think you're taking a bit of a bit of leap here. 
    • You literally just edited your earlier reply to remove the point you made about it being “politicians”.  Then you call me pathetic.    I’m  not trying to say you approve any of the ugly right wing nonsense.  But I AM Saying your earlier post suggesting  violent rhetoric being “left wing” was one-sided and incorrect 
    • I never said that. Saying I don’t like some of the rhetoric coming from the left doesn’t mean I approve of Farage et al saying that Afghans being brought here to protect their lives and thank them for their service means there is an incalculable threat to women.    Anything to score a cheap point. It’s pretty pathetic. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...