= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
jmed comments on SIAI’s Short-Term Research Program - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (48)
No delete button is an awesome feature. WTF?
I want to be able to downvote this!
Edit: In this particular case, I shouldn't, since it wasn't intentional. (Incidentally, this is the way to amend/retract comments. Adding a note. There is a separate use case of removing stuff posted by mistake.)
jmed writes that it was originally a comment posted by accident that couldn't be deleted, so my comment doesn't apply in this case. But giving users ability to block downvoting and still having their text fixed in discussion seems like a bad thing. Even "revoked" comments need to be community-moderated. I understand that this is intended to set up incentives that prevent deletion of comments, but perhaps limiting negative comment score instead could do the trick.
Oh, so that's why I see all these comments with text struck out! I don't understand why the feature works this way and I don't like it. Did someone explain the rationale somewhere?
Comments can still be edited down to the former deletion message, but one-button deletion was replaced with revocation in order to deincentivize the deletion of comments with children.