Timeline for Allow high rep (or moderator-eligible?) users to delete obsolete comments
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
31 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Jan 19, 2015 at 0:38 | history | bounty ended | CRABOLO | ||
| S Jan 19, 2015 at 0:38 | history | notice removed | CRABOLO | ||
| Jan 12, 2015 at 12:39 | history | edited | Dave Newton | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 66 characters in body
|
| S Jan 12, 2015 at 0:07 | history | bounty started | CRABOLO | ||
| S Jan 12, 2015 at 0:07 | history | notice added | CRABOLO | Reward existing answer | |
| Sep 4, 2012 at 17:28 | vote | accept | Dave Newton | ||
| Sep 1, 2012 at 22:15 | comment | added | Dave Newton | @Purmou That's fine, but I don't see any reason for that to be a reason to metro them around, either--they're still cognitive overhead without value. | |
| Sep 1, 2012 at 19:38 | comment | added | Someone | I honestly don't think "noisy" comments are as much of a problem as people make them out to be. | |
| Sep 1, 2012 at 18:17 | comment | added | Dave Newton | @TheElementofMagic I mean the full mod requirements, including badges. I'll make that more clear; thanks. | |
| Sep 1, 2012 at 18:14 | history | edited | Dave Newton | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 167 characters in body
|
| Sep 1, 2012 at 17:59 | comment | added | Jeremy | By "can run for moderator" do you mean the amount required to nominate yourself? (3k on SO) | |
| Sep 1, 2012 at 17:47 | history | edited | Dave Newton | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Sep 1, 2012 at 0:57 | answer | added | blahdiblah | timeline score: 16 | |
| Aug 31, 2012 at 23:49 | comment | added | Dave Newton | @Ben That's the point of limiting it to responsible people. Some comments are unambiguously obsolete-and I'd almost guarantee you that you know precisely what kind of comments I mean. | |
| Aug 31, 2012 at 23:40 | comment | added | ben is uǝq backwards | @DaveNewton, that's not what you're suggesting. You're going to give me the power, on my own, to delete comments, no matter my expertise. I would be in favour if it wasn't just one person doing the deleting. Yes, I could do it in my areas without much bother but I'm (I think) a good SO citizen and help close blatantly NARQ C++ questions when I don't have a clue what's going on. It's easy to tell that the question itself is a pile of crap though. Comments, because of their ephemeral status are more ambiguous, I think. | |
| Aug 31, 2012 at 23:36 | comment | added | Dave Newton | @Ben Really? You can't identify an obsolete comment in your field(s) of expertise? I'm either skeptical, or depressed. | |
| Aug 31, 2012 at 23:25 | comment | added | ben is uǝq backwards |
Writing as someone who is at "can run for moderator level" I'm not entirely certain I can be trusted to decide, on my own, what is correct and what isn't. There is a reason why I don't want to be a moderator...
|
|
| Aug 31, 2012 at 22:56 | history | edited | Dave Newton | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Aug 31, 2012 at 22:26 | history | edited | Dave Newton | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 195 characters in body
|
| Aug 31, 2012 at 21:43 | comment | added | Dave Newton | @YannisRizos I'm sympathetic to the lack of notification, which is why I'm putting the rep at a range casual users aren't likely to reach, and basically aiming at "can run for moderator" levels--which might be a better cut-off point than simply rep. | |
| Aug 31, 2012 at 21:38 | comment | added | yannis |
I can already edit questions and answers, which I'd argue can cause more damage than deleting clearly-irrelevant comments. This I also don't agree with, when you edit the question is bumped, someone will notice your damaging edit and revert it. But no one is notified when a comment is deleted... Don't get me wrong, I want this feature (or something similar), I'm being a bit harsh on you because I wouldn't want this declined just because it was poorly presented.
|
|
| Aug 31, 2012 at 21:36 | history | edited | yannis | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Aug 31, 2012 at 21:34 | comment | added | yannis |
@DaveNewton but I tend to assume the best That's all good, now look at my rantish comment and how it got upvoted almost immediately ;)
|
|
| Aug 31, 2012 at 21:33 | history | edited | Dave Newton | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 24 characters in body
|
| Aug 31, 2012 at 21:32 | comment | added | Dave Newton | @YannisRizos Edit and re-tag then; AFAIC it's a feature request. Personally, I would have read the part about "popular" comments to assume the comments would be useful, but I tend to assume the best, rather than the worst. A shortcoming of my personality, I'm sure, as is the occasional injection of some humor. | |
| Aug 31, 2012 at 21:32 | history | edited | randomMod |
edited tags
|
|
| Aug 31, 2012 at 21:27 | comment | added | Andrew Barber | @YannisRizos That is an excellent point; if such an idea were implemented, it should most assuredly not exclude high-voted comments. Quite often, such comments are those most in needing of being deleted. Including obsolete ones; for example, "What have you tried?" variants, after the OP has edited in the things they tried. | |
| Aug 31, 2012 at 21:26 | comment | added | yannis |
I have 50k rep (SO), which may indicate I know enough to be responsible. <rant> Yet you chose a horrible title for this, didn't bother to tag it appropriately, and confuse popularity with usefulness by excluding upvoted comments. 99% of upvoted comments are upvoted because they are pure snark, and these are the ones you'd want to exclude? </rant>
|
|
| Aug 31, 2012 at 21:22 | comment | added | yannis | @BenBrocka That feature request must be implemented, even if only because you posted it on my birthday. | |
| Aug 31, 2012 at 21:17 | comment | added | Zelda | IMO comment flagging in theory works just fine for this, but we could use some comment flag revamps to make it practical | |
| Aug 31, 2012 at 21:10 | history | asked | Dave Newton | CC BY-SA 3.0 |