10

I was on this page:

enter image description here

It looks like a haunted page, with no revisions giving the right information, when you click on any revision, looks like the revision and the contents do not match.

enter image description here

And also the next crazy thing I saw is, when I expand the votes:

enter image description here

All the votes were 0 / 0, which cannot be possible. Even if it is caching, I don't think these are cached for an year?

Can Sklivvz ♦ or someone explain me what's happening on here? If this was intended, why isn't it consistent? Should I blame caching?

4
  • 1
    I observed this vote count behavior several times with deleted users. I guess the vote count is not recomputed when the user that voted gets deleted. Looks like you can trigger recalculation when you show the expanded votes, thus it shows the correct count now..
    – Floern
    Commented May 26, 2016 at 12:55
  • 1
    @Floern the vote count issue is due to invalidated votes, it happens when sock puppet accounts are used, then merged, then it actually means the user voted on his own posts - so it's invalidated, not deleted. (i.e. the votes are still there in the database, just have no effect) Commented May 26, 2016 at 13:12
  • 4
    They are hiding precious drama from us! We must haves it!
    – user1228
    Commented May 26, 2016 at 13:30
  • 1
    @Won't Exactly, at least 20k+ users... Commented May 26, 2016 at 13:32

1 Answer 1

13

Stack Exchange employees have, and always had, the power to make edits without leaving a trace in the revisions.

This is useful for cases like posting private information by mistake (e.g.passwords) or, as in this case, some major trolling with extreme bad language. So the SE employee who appears as the editor made such a permanent edit without leaving a trace in the revisions.

Recently (February 2016) moderators also got this same power, though not single-handedly.

12
  • Ha ha ha... That's really bad... :P Commented May 26, 2016 at 13:10
  • Lemme wait until the person replies... Commented May 26, 2016 at 13:55
  • @Praveen what person? Who? Commented May 26, 2016 at 13:56
  • Sklivvz ♦ Commented May 26, 2016 at 13:56
  • 3
    What makes you think he will reply? There are thousands of bug reports here, only few get official reply. I still wait for replies to direct comments I left years ago. Besides, what I posted is not a guess. That's how things work, you won't likely get a better response anyway Commented May 26, 2016 at 14:04
  • I definitely respect and appreciate your time, and that's why I have voted you up as well. Just for my peace of mind and gut feeling, I might get a reply. Else, yours will be the future accepted answer. :) Commented May 26, 2016 at 14:39
  • 1
    No problem, I just wanted to let you know that most chances are that you won't get such a reply. Commented May 26, 2016 at 14:49
  • I understand... :) Commented May 26, 2016 at 14:50
  • 2
    @PraveenKumar - This is the correct answer. Those answers were left as a part of a trolling attack on a specific moderator, and SE employees redacted their content because of the nature of what was posted. Like is stated, nothing more to see here. Commented May 26, 2016 at 15:48
  • @BradLarson Thanks buddy, accepted it. Commented May 26, 2016 at 15:49
  • 1
    @PraveenKumar To clarify, the votes changed when you expanded them because the score is cached. There is a script that automatically fixes them and runs at midnight UTC every night, but it does not fix deleted posts because they're, well, deleted. Attempting to expand the votes recalculated and fixed the score manually.
    – animuson StaffMod
    Commented May 27, 2016 at 0:54
  • Sure and thanks @animuson. Commented May 27, 2016 at 7:36

You must log in to answer this question.

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