Aquaint yourself with the rules

[Sae]

The missing piece for me is, if say, somebody completely deleted everything in their post. Why is it imperative to restore it?

So if księżycowy deletes all the entries in the Master list of resources for Vietnamese, Mongolian? That is OK for you? You see, it isn't just about the conversation threads or the logs. It is also the resources and other things. And someone deletion editing away 10-15 languages of the Master List in one fell swoop was the reason all this started.

This is probably going to come off as rude and I don't mean to be, but it might actually help make a point, but did you read my posts fully?

I have not disagreed with the rule existing, only the punishment and even in disagreeing with the punishment, I've tried to seek clarity in order to understand why. And I've said I don't think it's ideal that people post delete and if anything, my support for a strike system means I agree with the rule, if I thought it was okay, I'd be against the rule entirely. So you'd know the answer to your question is "no".

And I also agree with rules against the long list of things people shouldn't do on a forum and don't get an automatic ban for.

And the reason that it helps with my point is that because despite my posts being shorter than the post containing all of the rules, the above is a detail you've missed if you've had to ask the question.

And just because something isn't okay to me, doesn't mean I think an automatic ban is in order, I don't think it's okay to insult people, but I'm not going to call for their ban if they do insult somebody.

But the punishment listed isn't specific to the scenario you've given either, it would be inclusive of the scenarios I gave too.

People can sometimes also misunderstand or misinterpret rules and at least strikes gives them room to correct that when discovering they're wrong.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse. You apear to be under the impression I didn't try all that before, but I did. It didn't work, so that ship has sailed, and it ain't coming back.

I'm not changing the rule. You "deletion edit" then you're banned. If anyone feels so strongly about this being wrong, you're free to stop coming here.

Whether it is an excuse or not still means that if somebody makes that mistake you're still cleaning up the mess. Nobody wins.

My reason for this feedback is that
a) obviously, I don't think people should be automatically banned for a mistake or for misinterpreting rules etc. and based around a rule whose harsh punishment is based on a technical limitation of the forum software not the severity of their actions (and judging by the post above mine, your specific concern has a viable alternative that was suggested)
b) in the event that's non-negotiable, I figure it serves to benefit all parties, yourself included that this rule has absolute clarity, visibility and emphasis. Nobody wants to get banned, you don't want to do a job you shouldn't have to do (that is risky & no fun) and nobody wants an admin getting burned out by such tasks.

And it doesn't have much visibility, clarity or emphasis. I believe you that you've tried everything else. But literally, the punishment for this rule is in a one liner in a paragraph near the bottom of a huge lengthy post of rules, it gets expanded upon in a separate thread, which is not even referenced by the rules. And this thread itself is titled in a way that doesn't implore people who have already read the rules to brush up on this particular rule, just those who haven't to actually go read them although the point of this thread is to emphasise that rule, but if people don't have a reason to get past the title then they're not gonna read it.

So I don't think it achieves point B.

Given the obvious importance of the rule, shouldn't it be presented with that importance?

Even if you disagree with my other points, resisting this one surely is self-flagellation?

[lavengro]

Perhaps partly because I am lazy by disposition, and perhaps partly because acquainting myself with the rules of anywhere is not really in my wheelhouse, but in any event I have not read any of the posts in this thread. I would however appreciate someone giving me a heads up if the rules ever change permitting forum members to flip off war-mongering leaders of other countries. I have a bunch of stuff lined up on deck ready to go if/when the rules change in this regard.

[aokoye]

Please take time to make sure you understand the rules of this forum and what is and is not acceptable.
Forum Rules

Having read this thread I do have some constructive feedback. The term "deletion-editing" is really obscure and it isn't actually clear what is meant. From the rule in question:

Deletion-Editing: Removing text from previously posts causes confusion within threads and ruins the continuity of the discussions. If you want to delete your post, use the "Delete" button. Although the information can be recovered, it requires a significant amount of work by the administration team doing data restoration. Deletion-Editing is an automatic ban, the duration of the ban to be determined by the moderators or admin.

This rule doesn't actually explain/define what "deletion-editing" is. I had actually written a post about this then reread it and the rule and realized that what you appear to be talking about is people deleting the content of their posts (as opposed to deleting posts). This is not actually mentioned in the above rule and, again, is not at all transparent from the phrase "deletion-editing" which I have never seen outside of these posts and is apparently a term used in genetics according to Google.

I would suggest overhauling the text and name of the rule so that you are accurately conveying what you're asking of people. For example:

Editing Posts (deleting large amounts of text)
Users are not allowed to edit their posts in such a way that the entirety of the post is deleted. Doing so will result in the user being banned. If you want your post to deleted follow the instructions that are at the bottom [maybe think about moving those instructions at the top and moving the multi-paragraph explanation to the bottom - again the goal should be clarity] of this post.

Due to the nature of this forum, users often rely on posts for language related resources. For that reason, it is not fair to users to allow the entirety of posts to be deleted. Again, if you feel as though a post that you have written should be deleted, please follow the instructions in the above post.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

The problem with laws is that legalese isn't actually accessible to the vast majority of a given population. Simple things like "yield to pedestrians at a crosswalk" (of course then the question is is that only at marked crosswalks?) or "don't use someone's credit card without their permission" are pretty logical and clear depending on how they're written (again - see that "what about unmarked crosswalks?" ambiguity). The problem comes when the law, or in this case rule, itself isn't clear.

[PeterMollenburg]

I can absolutely see both sides of the argument here as making a whole lot of sense.

Were I in rdearman's shoes, having started off with trying other methods to resolve this issue, which didn't work, that/those ship(s) sailed, now it would most definitely be incredibly frustrating, time-consuming and counter-productive to 'fold' on this rule. I'd also have little patience for dealing with said issue here on the forum, given those other methods have been tried and didn't work out.

However, as other others have shared, I can see that it appears as a harsh rule, perhaps ambiguous in its definition, and could catch some people off guard, maybe myself included. Still, it seems that not applying this rule strictly would just lead to, well, time-wasting, tedious frustrating work. Us language learners know how precious time is

Therefore, I think Deinonysus' post below does appear to offer a sensible solution which would likely see both sides content with the application of that solution. At least some consideration of this 'Wiki' solution would illustrate a more democratic leadership than what is coming off as perhaps an authoritarian approach to a very frustrating situation requiring a blanket strict rule. I don't feel like the 'if you don't like it leave' is a very inclusive way to manage the forum - a place we pride ourselves on being friendly and welcoming. But I get it, sometimes harsh rules may seem necessary, but it seems there is another way (see below).

There is some additional context in this thread I started a few years ago: Deleting your own posts should not be bannable. All critical information should be in the Wiki.

It is onerous for the devs to restore forum posts that have been edit-deleted, but it is trivial to restore wiki pages that have been vandalized. Therefore, I suggested that the proper place to store resource information is the Wiki. By linking to forum posts in the "Master List of Resources" thread rather than Wiki articles, this forum endorses forum posts rather than the Wiki as the official way of maintaining resource information.

My suggestion of advertising the Wiki over forum posts as the proper place for resource information was not considered. Rather, forum posts continue to be advertised as the proper place to put resource information, and therefore the solution for maintaining the integrity of resource info continues to be to ban or threaten to ban users for deleting their own posts.

[Peluche]

As folks have pointed out in this thread, there are issues with what really the rule is, and how it is being presented.

1. Deletion-editiing. What if one removes 10% of a post? 50%? 90%? The post really has not been deleted. What is fine and what is bannable?
2. Request for post removal: If if księżycowy requests deletion of all the entries in the Master list of resources for Vietnamese, Mongolian; will the admin team really do it, or will they copy over the info to some other place, in which case it is moving the content, not deletion?

The underlying issue is that the admin team has decided that content posted on this forum becomes the property of the admin team, and the original creators lose deletion rights. While I agree that the admin team should be free to copy over whatever is posted here, I do not agree that banning users for editing their own posts is reasonable.

I agree with Deinonysus that important info should be archived via an alternate mechanism. There cannot be that many posts with ban worthy deletion-content. In the thread Deinonysus linked, a mod had explicitly said that deleting posts in logs was fine, it was the important content that could not be deleted. Now the rule says nothing can be deleted by users via edits.

[rdearman]

Wiki wiki, blah blah blah. Nobody ever looks at the wiki let alone updates it. So why not stop giving me grief and update the wiki?

Or better yet, I will give you all a dump of the database and you can run the site yourselves. Save me time, hassle and arguments.

And YES we REALLY would delete the REDACTED post, we have before. I don't like the implications that we have some underhandled agenda. This site it a money sink and a pain in the ass. I have had enough. I am going to take a break. Goodbye.

[PeterMollenburg]

Wiki wiki, blah blah blah. Nobody ever looks at the wiki let alone updates it. So why not stop giving me grief and update the wiki?

Or better yet, I will give you all a dump of the database and you can run the site yourselves. Save me time, hassle and arguments.

And YES we REALLY would delete the REDACTED post, we have before. I don't like the implications that we have some underhandled agenda. This site it a money sink and a pain in the ass. I have had enough. I am going to take a break. Goodbye.

Now you're just breaking your own rules and behaving badly. Clearly the frustrationhas boiled over and you've left your diplomacy at the door, because in spite of the efforts to discuss this constructively, you're behaving like an asshole.

[iguanamon]

As one of the long time members here, I remember what things were like back at HTLAL- when the site routinely went down with no explanation given- for long stretches of time; when people were conned into paying for "pro" membership just to get an icon next to their user name; when said pro membership got you "enhanced" searching.

Rick emailed me, along with some of the other members about how he had created a new forum site for us to go talk about languages and language-learning. He and emk developed, paid for. and kept the site running- without ads; without fund-raising. They also keep the forum as a generally nice place to be.

Nobody flames here. Politics is generally not allowed- I have my own political opinions that I can express on any number of social media sites without making my fellow language learners thinking ill of me if I express them here.

So, I can understand Rick's frustration. I've deleted posts I've posted when, upon reflection, I probably shouldn't have posted... but not after they've gotten votes. So, given all that Rick and emk have done for us, I think they've earned some latitude in regard to their rules. Anybody who wants can start their own forum if they don't want to follow the rules. It doesn't take that much money to run a forum- it does take goodwill, effort, moderation, and caring to run a successful forum.

Let's cut the man some slack.

[PeterMollenburg]

Let's cut the man some slack.

Absolutely. I completely, agree, as I'd indicated, and as do many of us. We do really appreciate the hard work that goes on behind the scenes.

This doesn't mean however, that the issue ought not be discussed, that alternatives can't be offered/suggested and considered, and that such alternatives be written off even if they initially do seem like poor ideas - we can discuss these things, right? Perhaps many solutions have been tested by rdearman and clearly didn't work, but we don't necessarily know this. We're fortunately not privy to the intricacies of attempting to resolve such problems. It must be annoying at times, for sure.

However, we're not out to attack rdearman, we're here trying to potentially come up with ideas that may make it easier for everyone involved, including rdearman. And, many of us get frustrated at times, but we all have to behave ourselves here and abide by certain rules regardless of our frustrations.

[Sae]

Wiki wiki, blah blah blah. Nobody ever looks at the wiki let alone updates it. So why not stop giving me grief and update the wiki?

Or better yet, I will give you all a dump of the database and you can run the site yourselves. Save me time, hassle and arguments.

And YES we REALLY would delete the REDACTED post, we have before. I don't like the implications that we have some underhandled agenda. This site it a money sink and a pain in the ass. I have had enough. I am going to take a break. Goodbye.

We're not trying to give you a hard time.

I don't think there is an underhanded agenda. Yes, there is a punishment I disagree with and hoped to discuss it calmly and maturely so either a better solution comes about or a solution that better helps with prevention.

But I'm not familiar with the deep lore, the hardships or problems this site has had or the baggage that has come with certain issues.

But I know you're doing this off of your own back and I have tried to empathize with that because yeah, I don't want the answer to the problem be that you have to do a job you hate and one that kinda sucks to do. So I hope you know this isn't against you.