Locked posts really are locked to most users. To moderators, however, locked posts are substantially less locked. Moderators can edit them, post comments to them, delete comments from them, and even if need be unlock them.
There is a curious gap in moderator powers, however. Moderators cannot rollback a locked post. A not uncommon use of locking (at least on Mathematics, where I
rule reside) is when a user is continually defacing their question (because they'd really rather delete it, but cannot due to answers) and you just want to hit pause on that situation.
I have just recently experienced a case where a user re-defaced their question within 20 seconds of my having rolled it back. When faced with a user who is this determined to deface their posts, a much easier workflow would be to first lock the post and then put it into a previous good state. I should now note that there are ways of doing this.
- As moderators can edit locked posts, just go to the source of the previous good revision, copy it, and make a good new revision.
- Moderators can edit revisions, and simply "editing" and saving an old revision will effectively roll it back. (This I have only recently become aware of.)
But if a moderator attempts to simply rollback a locked post in the usual manner, they are met with a popup declaring
This makes no sense to me: I'm a moderator gosh darn it!
Since there are methods for moderators to effectively rollback locked posts, wouldn't it be easier to just allow us that small additional privilege to actually rollback locked posts?