= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
buybuydandavis comments on META: Deletion policy - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (91)
Suggestion: I recommend sending people their deleted posts.
I find it annoying to spend the effort to type a post, only to have it disappear into a bit bucket. If you want it gone, that's your prerogative, but I think it is a breach of etiquette for a forum to destroy information created by a forum user.
Now I assume you found the original post a breach of etiquette, so may feel that tit for tat is the right policy here. I'd consider an intentional breach of etiquette as an unnecessary escalation.
You can still see your own banned comments on your user page. This might be false for posts, I'm not sure.
Judging by Kodos96's user page, the same is the case for posts, i.e., they are still visible after being "censored."
I used to do that for a long time on a large-ish subreddit I mod. Eventually, it became too much of a burden, the workload footprint was too large. It may be a feasible policy to try and do that on LW, given the (hopefully) very low volume of deleted content.
This sounds a like something that could be handled by a script so as to be an utterly transparent process. In your role as a subreddit mod, it wouldn't be so easy, but they have source access.
Good idea, that difference escaped my notice.
This seems like a good thing to do as a courtesy in cases where it seems reasonable.
If it were an actual policy, you'd want to put some limits on it, i.e. "if the post is longer than X words and/or contains something that was clearly meant to be intelligent thought."