You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

TimS comments on The Universal Medical Journal Article Error - Less Wrong Discussion

6 Post author: PhilGoetz 29 April 2014 05:57PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (189)
Tags: error statistics medicine

Comments (189)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: TimS 06 April 2013 05:04:50PM 1 point [-]

As it happens, I remember what Eugine_Nier wrote, and I am certain it did not meet the local criteria for mod-blocking.

(Anonymous downvoter: What is it in wedrifid's post you'd like to see less of? Helpful commentary about the mechanics of this site is not on my list of things to downvote).

Comment author: wedrifid 06 April 2013 05:08:22PM *  6 points [-]

As it happens, I remember what Eugine_Nier wrote, and I am certain it did not meet the local criteria for mod-blocking.

Interesting. This suggests that a feature has changed at some point since the retraction-then-delete feature was first implemented. (I have memories of needing to be careful to edit the text to blank then retract so as to best emulate the missing 'delete' feature.)

I notice that I am confused. Investigates.

  • Testing deletion feature. Deletion of (grandparent) comment that you have already replied to: Fail. It is still not (usually) possible to delete comments with replies.
  • Check for moderator deletion. (ie. Moderator use of the ban feature, actual delete per se is extremely rare). Confirm absence of a reply on Eugine_Nier's page that fits that part of history. The comment is, indeed, deleted not banned.
  • Check timestamps for plausibility of race condition. Ahh. Yes. Tim, you replied to Eugine within 3 minutes of him writing the comment. This means that most likely Eugine deleted his message while you were writing your reply. Your comment was still permitted to be made despite the deleted parent. The reverse order may also be possible, depending on the details of implementation. Either way, the principle is the same.
Comment author: TimS 06 April 2013 06:42:29PM *  0 points [-]

ArisKatsaris suggests browser refresh, not timestamps, is the issue.

Comment author: wedrifid 06 April 2013 07:02:58PM *  2 points [-]

ArisKatsaris suggests browser refresh, not timestamps, is the issue.

He is describing the same phenomenon. The timestamps give an indication as to how likely the race condition is to occur based on the delays between GETs and POSTs. If the comments were a day apart I would have tentatively suggested "Perhaps one of you deleted or replied to a comments page that was old?". Whereas given that the timestamps were within 3 minutes I could more or less definitively declare the question solved.

Comment author: TimS 06 April 2013 08:57:20PM 1 point [-]

Thanks. I'm not technologically fluent enough to tell the difference between what you said and what he said without the explanation.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 08 April 2013 04:36:39AM 2 points [-]

For the record, I did in fact delete the comment.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit