Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

Subsequent to writing up Replace Windows Drive Format tool with Rufus I found out, through my own jumping the gun, that Rufus doesn't actually format anything but external drives :( (Pity I don't have the knowledge or time to alter it so it can be a full replacement for the Windows Drive Format tool).

However, after going in to edit it, I thought about adding a note about another likely way of achieving this goal (Changing what the right click context menu launches), but have run out of time to look to make sure this is possible before mentioning it. The note was to try and stop people making this suggestion, when this is not what I am looking for, and they may not make if asked not to.

[Presuming I am not unaware of existing functionality] Any possibility of adding a way of hiding questions, devoid of existing answers/comments, from other users while being edited?

Pseudo-code example of what I mean:

    if(QuestionAnswer=0 & QuestionComments=0)
share|improve this question
If there has been no input yet, you can always delete it, edit and then undelete. – Bart Aug 9 '13 at 18:31
@Bart - That's an idea which I will use in the interim, but I wonder if something more automated could be implemented, given I don't know the purpose of showing people a new question when it could be currently edited to be vastly different from comments/answers will be added during the edit. – user66001 Aug 9 '13 at 18:32
Automated in what way? Do you mean that you want the question to be hidden every time an edit is in progress? – George Cummins Aug 9 '13 at 18:33
There wouldn't be any point to automating such a process; but that's pretty much exactly what you need here. – Andrew Barber Aug 9 '13 at 18:33
@GeorgeCummins - So that the question is hidden from the New questions, Featured Questions, etc, when the conditions above are met; Only edits of "new" questions (as defined above), as I can think of several disadvantages of doing this to questions that have comments/answers already. – user66001 Aug 9 '13 at 18:34
@user66001 If the question has already been out there for a while and has answers then why do you want to be hiding it to begin with? Either it's not a radical change, just an improvement, and it can be out there while you improve it, or it's such a radical change that it really ought to be a new question. – Servy Aug 9 '13 at 18:37
@AndrewBarber - 3 clicks, compared to something the system does. I can see the advantage. – user66001 Aug 9 '13 at 18:39
How could the system possibly do this automatically? How would it know? – Andrew Barber Aug 9 '13 at 18:40
@AndrewBarber - pseudo code - if(Edit=1{if(Answer=0 & CommentsOnQuestion=0){Question=HideFromSearchesAndLists}} – user66001 Aug 9 '13 at 18:42
@GeorgeCummins - Thanks for the link; Will have to read it later. What I am suggesting however is not a short but correct question, but a all-thought-out question having to be edited to slightly change the specifics due to new discoveries. As it stands, someone could write up a long answer, post it before one finishes their question edit, then the answer could be completely irrelevant to the question. – user66001 Aug 9 '13 at 18:46
@George Cummins - Obviously this gets harder/"impossible" to do if the situation is replicated, with a question that already has answers, but don't consider that not a reason to consider what can be done easily. – user66001 Aug 9 '13 at 18:48
up vote 10 down vote accepted

I have a feeling that most people neither expect nor want their question to be hidden while they're fixing a grammatical error that they've just saw.

Invisible processes that hide questions can be troublesome and should only be implemented with a great deal of consideration.

If you want your question hidden, then deleting it does exactly that. In-fact the verbage delete is a misnomer, because it doesn't actually delete your question. It merely hides it from the general public and removes it from lists.

share|improve this answer
Ah. Didn't realise this (Should have tried Bart's suggestion). Perhaps, then, it might be an idea to rename that button? – user66001 Aug 9 '13 at 18:59
@user66001 I doubt it. Hiding it from everyone except you, mods, and 10k users that already have a direct link is pretty darn close to deletion, in a practical sense. – Servy Aug 9 '13 at 19:03
@user66001 when a user is looking to delete their question, hiding it accomplishes the same goal from the user's perspective, but they'll still be looking for a button that says delete – Sam I am Aug 9 '13 at 19:03
@SamIam - Not sure I agree with your comment, in the strictest sense. When I want something "deleted", I want it removed permanently. However, agree that most people will likely look for a button named "delete" and it conveys a more intuitive action. – user66001 Aug 9 '13 at 19:11
@user It's not really any different than deletes anywhere else. The content is never really gone. On any kind of disk, it can be recovered. And any time you're using a backup system... – Cody Gray Aug 10 '13 at 5:08
@SamIam - "On any kind of disk, it can be recovered" - This would seem to depend on how the storage medium is decommissioned. Good hammer session, after a couple dozen zeroing out passes, of data that was stored separate to the FAT, and I would love to see someone try :) – user66001 Aug 10 '13 at 5:45
And I thought I was the only one who "deleted" files like that^... – AsheeshR Aug 10 '13 at 5:55
@user66001: It can be done if there are parts of the disk platters that are large enough. It's the reason some agencies dealing with extremely sensitive information are required to not only repeatedly wipe the drive contents, but to physically shred the hard drive. (Yes, shred, as in "large, truck mounted paper-shredder type device that physically shreds the physical disk drive like a sheet of paper". We have to do that with obsolete computers-the hard disks have to be shredded (and that process documented by the company shredding them)). – Ken White Aug 10 '13 at 20:43
@KenWhite - Interesting to hear from someone who knows of this being done, but wasn't meaning "hammer session" to be literal, just to make a point. – user66001 Aug 11 '13 at 3:48
@user66001: I know. :-) I was letting you know you missed it. There are companies that charge $$$$$ to do exactly this (forensic recovery of data from damaged hard drives), including recovering data from hard drives damaged in fires or other catastrophic events. I was addressing your "I would love to see someone try" to let you know it's being done every day (thus the "shredding" requirement (and expense) I described). – Ken White Aug 11 '13 at 4:06
@KenWhite - Ah. I do know of companies that recover data as long as the platters are in decent shape (Have used one before), but don't know how much success anyone would have with significantly fragmented data, on a drive without a allocation system, though. – user66001 Aug 11 '13 at 18:58

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .