I'm posting this following the discussion at Should we disallow users from immediately deleting their accounts if they've made one post?, which seems to be positive and generally in favor of doing this. I got reminded of this issue again because the same thing I mentioned in the other post happened just now, and I figured I should file a formal request for this.

Some facts for context:

  • Currently, any user can request that their account be deleted, by going to the relevant page in their profile settings and clicking the button. For users who've made 0-1 posts (and haven't voted more than once), their account is immediately deleted. For others, it starts a 24-hour timer ticking towards deletion, which can be cancelled by the user.

  • Additionally, if an account with an active suspension is deleted (suspended users can still delete their accounts; the link doesn't show in their profile settings, but they can still access the page manually), the suspension is reinstated on any new accounts they create, as part of the Anti-Recidivism System.

  • Finally, if a moderator deletes or destroys an account for spam or abuse, an automatic "suspension" is recorded under the account immediately before the account is deleted. This "suspension" is "reinstated" if the same user creates another account.

These days, we've been encountering a troll (full details only visible to members of the Charcoal Team on Stack Overflow Teams) who seems to know all of the above facts and immediately deletes their account after making their trollish post. This allows them to sidestep the Anti-Recidivism System, as it's usually too early for a moderator to arrive and suspend their account, or delete it for abuse, and they effectively get out without any sort of block.

Also, I believe that the reason behind allowing users to delete their accounts immediately if they've posted once is historical: this feature was introduced before there was any sort of 24-hour timer, and all deletions were otherwise handled manually by SE staff. This would allow users to leave the site gracefully if they tested the waters and decided they didn't like it. However, it doesn't make much sense anymore, since users can now start the 24-hour deletion timer by themselves, immediately.

There were other solutions proposed in the discussion post I linked, such as to allow moderators to take actions like issue suspensions on deleted accounts, or to "soft-delete" accounts instead of the current model of hard-deleting them, but I'm sticking to my original proposed solution because according to Shog, this is the most technically feasible solution.

In summary, the system should be changed to only immediately delete accounts if the user has made 0 posts, instead of deleting immediately if the user has made 0-1 posts. Users who've made one post should have to wait 24 hours like everyone else. This way, we can prevent trolls from getting away scot-free by allowing them to delete their account to avoid suspension.


4 Answers 4


The logic for when immediate self-deletions are allowed has been changed. This option is now only open to users who have not posted anything (who have less than 101 rep). Once a user has posted anything on the site (even if they subsequently delete the post), they will no longer be afforded the immediate account deletion option, and will have to go through the same 24 hour deletion process as everyone else.

A new user posts
Goes to delete their account
Sorry, wait a day

  • 14
    ooh, shiny... I think this will be appreciated by some more than others :D Commented Aug 4, 2020 at 14:35
  • 4
    Does this include comments and posts within chats?
    – ouflak
    Commented Aug 4, 2020 at 14:45
  • 2
    @ouflak A new user can't post comments, nor chat, without some sort of contribution. Chances are incredibly high that contribution will be a question or an answer, not the dozen or two needed to do anything else.
    – fbueckert
    Commented Aug 4, 2020 at 15:36
  • thing we kind of lost with this change is insta-deletion of negative score posts. Can't tell though whether this is worth worrying about
    – gnat
    Commented Aug 4, 2020 at 15:36
  • 1
    It is still closed off to people who've voted more than once, as it was in the previous model, right? Commented Aug 4, 2020 at 18:36
  • 1
    @SonictheMaskedWerehog That has been removed. You need at least 15 rep to vote, hard to get without posting (yes, you can make 7 suggested edits and get them approved, and then vote a couple of times and then delete your account, but that is a pretty extreme edge case). Commented Aug 4, 2020 at 18:54
  • Other types of votes such as accepting answers and voting on suggested edits didn't count toward the previous threshold? Commented Aug 4, 2020 at 18:56
  • 2
    @SonictheMaskedWerehog all votes counted towards the previous threshold (though accept answer no longer relevant if you haven't posted a question). Commented Aug 4, 2020 at 19:06
  • Yaakov, I noticed something that doesn't match my understanding of how system works now: this question at Math.SE was asked 7 hours ago, but user account is shown deleted - apparently less than 24 hours after posting - how could that be? At first I thought reason for "link-less" asker name over there is that question was migrated but checking the revisions history shows that this is not the case
    – gnat
    Commented Sep 7, 2020 at 18:04
  • 2
    @gnat I can't comment on the specifics of this case other than to say that everything is working as it should (and maybe your assumptions here are off). Commented Sep 8, 2020 at 9:44
  • A quick clarification question: what about users who've never made any posts, but cast enough votes to trigger the mechanism in which their deletion would be held up for staff to review to potentially preserve votes? Will such users have their account immediately removed, or will they go through the staff system? (They can have less than 101 rep if they give out a bounty, or on meta by downvoting an answer.) Commented Jan 29, 2021 at 2:49
  • Also, the help center needs to be updated to reflect this change. Commented Jan 29, 2021 at 3:02
  • Yaako FWIW I currently plan to check the impact of this "extreme edge case" you mentioned above in reply to @Sonicthe
    – gnat
    Commented Feb 26, 2021 at 16:25

This came to be in an odd way, at a time where the deletion process involved a lot of manual checks and steps. Problems that kept creeping up were accounts that were not being deleted timely, or the process in general just sort of adding insult to injury.

That was a couple of years ago, we've gotten significantly better there.

There's no real practical reason to skip the timer if an account has done anything at all, including changing the default display name or avatar - this gives mods time to look for abuse patterns. While in cases where someone accidentally logged in using Facebook instead of Google (and did nothing else at all), we could still just let the deletion proceed immediately.

Need to sanity check some processes with support and be very sure here (forgetting something in this sort of thing could be disastrous), but I'm almost positive we could just flip this on and not worry. It's the best possible compromise, IMHO.

Will update, might take a week or two, but it should be easy to schedule since it's a clear win with little cost for troll swatting (everyone's favorite game!)

  • 4
    account deletion triggers removal of their negative score posts (this simplifies site content cleanup). Implementing proposed feature would mean this removal will be delayed for 24h and, although I believe that this is acceptable I would still recommend to check respective statistics and estimate how many removals may get delayed because of this change. Just want to make sure that this part of the impact is under control
    – gnat
    Commented Aug 24, 2018 at 19:08
  • 3
    What is the outcome of the review? Commented Aug 30, 2018 at 18:25
  • 2
    @SonictheInclusiveHedgehog Still pending, I don't think much but urgent bug fixes will get done until we finish all new site themes / etc, because not having that done continues to rack up old debt in new code. Once that's done, I think we can resume more regular roadmaps and estimates on when something will happen while being more correct than incorrect about the timeline :)
    – user50049
    Commented Sep 6, 2018 at 12:49
  • 6
    Hi Tim, it's nearly December now. Any updates on this? Commented Nov 26, 2018 at 9:59

A thing worth noting with regards to the trick phenomenon you describe is, it seems to be increasing the attrition rate - because this way, people can drop off immediately after their first interaction with the site.

Per my reading of the explanation here, that makes a solid reason to put effort into to addressing this issue (so that at the very least it won't obscure statistics that are currently considered so important by SE team).

New users just don't stick around anywhere close to how they did a few years ago... If we lose even 25% of the users we manage to convince to interact with our sites, and the number that try every day keeps going up exponentially, then it's only a matter of time before we burn through an entire market faster than that market significantly replenishes itself... if we don't control this rate, we could (much sooner than later) say that the whole market uses, has tried and stopped using, or won't try our sites...

(not to mention that as pointed in comments that this loophole opens up quite "promising" opportunities of abusive exploits for spammers and homework cheaters)

Also possibly related: Encouraging users to create an account (and keep it)

  • 2
    It's not that big of a footprint, and you can usually scope these by the presence of flags, it just compounds the queries a bit (but in all honesty, now that it's moving out of ad-hoc stuff I was slinging together on our private SEDE instance with throttled access to production over to R studio, this is less of an issue). Can't say it doesn't cloud it, but not to a big extent, at least that I know of now.
    – user50049
    Commented Aug 24, 2018 at 17:19
  • 4
    yeah @TimPost as I mentioned in comments under the question I am inclined to think that with regards to this loophole trolls are not much of an issue. I am more concerned about a risk that spammers and homework cheaters learn about it, because these categories have potential of making much more abuse
    – gnat
    Commented Aug 24, 2018 at 17:37

These days, we've been encountering a troll who seems to know all of the above facts and immediately deletes their account after making their trollish post.

Maybe the Fire Department put them out.

There have been a few times when I flagged egregious stuff and the moment I clicked [Submit] they were hammered to 404, the page instantly didn't exist.

A solution to your question, with minimal programming effort and maximum usefulness, would be to leave it mostly as-is and permit moderators to access the account for up to a week after deletion. That way they could investigate without a rug pull and keep a hold on something if they are whack-a-moled. It would also allow brand new accounts to be cross referenced to something from problem IP addresses, etc. if trouble is automagically detected.


You must log in to answer this question.

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