14

The link for redacting PII (or whatever) from a post is available on the revision history page of a post. That's a sensible spot to put it, but it's a bit out of reach if the post does not yet have any edits made.

We can of course force the URL (i.e. visit /posts/####/revisions), but that can be cumbersome. You could also create an edit then make the redaction, but that just adds unnecessary noise.

There are userscripts that add the link to revision history and I understand why it's not available by default, but could we have a link inserted into the post mod actions menu? Or as Robert suggests, a redact option in the menu?

If an edit is needed to implement a redaction, then it should be a simple matter for the system create that edit when it knows what the moderator wants to remove. Add a 'redact' function to the 'mod' menu and make it a ONE edit-and-redact operation.

2

This isn't a bad idea, although I should note that you have to have an edit on the post for redaction to work properly anyway, since otherwise the rendered HTML containing the sensitive information is cached...

So while you can redact the displayed revision and then make some trivial edit to trigger the re-render, you might as well just edit out the sensitive info normally and then redact the previous revision(s).

  • If that's the SE sanctioned workflow then I can work with that, but I'm not 100% clear on your explanation. The rendered HTML is cached where/by who? I removed a signature on this post just to do some redaction testing, but from what I can see it was a successful redaction. What's the harm in doing it that way? – JohnB Aug 17 '16 at 16:02
  • We may have fixed that bug then :) – Shog9 Aug 17 '16 at 16:38
  • 7
    If an edit is needed to implement a redaction, then it should be a simple matter for the system create that edit when it knows what the moderator wants to remove. Add a 'redact' function to the 'mod' menu and make it a ONE edit-and-redact operation. – Robert Cartaino Aug 17 '16 at 17:15
  • That would be a good feature-request, @RobertCartaino... – Shog9 Aug 17 '16 at 17:23
  • If caching is no longer an issue then I agree with @Robert, there's no point in having us edit the post twice. Either adding a revision history link to the menu or an option to redact would both be an improvement to the current workflow. I've added Robert's suggestion to the original post. – JohnB Aug 18 '16 at 14:34

You must log in to answer this question.

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