When users decide to rage-quit, they will often try to remove all of their previous contributions by editing them out. This event triggers an automatic "potential self-destruction of content" flag. But currently, the resulting clean-up must be done manually, which can be a pain and "noisy" if a user gets very far before being stopped.

I suggest an "undo user activity" option in the mod menu, allowing a moderator to revert any deletes, new posts, edits, and voting in the specified time frame. The time should probably be limited to something like 24 hours, but selectable.

  • You went a little further than I was thinking about going. I was just thinking about rolling back edits, even just those to one's own posts, rather than votes and everything else. Either way would be progress, though. – Cody Gray Apr 27 '12 at 8:10
  • 1
    +1 Nice idea. But maybe @TheEstablishment is right. Let's not revert everything. If the flag is about the self-destruction the edit reversion is enough. If they, while rage-quitting, will engage in some serial down-voting, the system will take care of it. – Alenanno Apr 27 '12 at 10:16
  • I might be missing something, but despite the cc license it seems quite disrespectful to not allow a user to delete all his posts. – David Mulder Apr 27 '12 at 13:09
  • 6
    @David: It's not the user's content anymore. From what I understand from the CC license, the user can be disassociated from the content upon request, but the user can't destroy or remove the content. – ale Apr 27 '12 at 13:26
  • 1
    Exactly. @DavidMulder the CC license is the whole reason why we don't let users delete all their posts. They've licensed it to the community, and if its been edited, it's no longer even theirs - it's a derivative work now. – nhinkle Apr 27 '12 at 18:38
  • @AlEverett, yes, I mentioned the cc license in my previous comment because I realize that license technically you are absolutely right. However I was talking about it being quite disrespectful as the majority of answers aren't edited by other users and purely on an ethical level it seems - to say the very least - odd to allow deletion under most circumstances but not in others (when it's most wanted by the user in question). I mean, it's constantly being treated as 'your' answer (despite the cc license) and then when you want to do something important your stopped. – David Mulder May 1 '12 at 9:26
  • 2
    @DavidMulder you're always allowed to request disassociation from a post if you really want it removed from your history. But the general rule of thumb is that once the community votes that a post is good, or if the answers to a question are good, it's reasonable to keep it around. – nhinkle May 1 '12 at 16:30

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .