Restoring deleted posts.

[kayla-la.livejournal.com]

I'm discussing this idea with the other moderators currently, but I also wanted the community's opinion on this idea, in the wake of another valid post being deleted.

First off, we will most likely be making a separate community whose soul purpose will be to archive posts. Probably not comments, but the posts themselves along with the name of the person who submitted it will be preserved in a place where the OPs can't delete it.

Assuming this happens, it will be because we have had a problem with people deleting their posts. Unfortunately, we can't do anything about it ourselves. We can't disable the ability to delete, and we don't get any sort of notification if it happens, so we don't even know unless someone happens to notice and alerts us. Then we can't even warn/ban the person who did it unless someone happens to remember their name because it leaves no trace behind.

Now, what I wanted to actually ask wasn't about that, but I wanted to know. How do you all feel about the idea of reposting deleted posts to the community?

For example, let's say Randomfurry12 posts about an artist taking their money and running. Artist gets mad, threatens them to delete post. They know it's against the rules, but they tuck tail and give into the blackmailing in hopes of getting their art/refund, so they delete the post and try to pretend it never existed. Well, too bad for them, but we already have the post archived in the mirror comm.

What do you guys think about the idea of then taking that post and reposting it back here to AB? If we were to do that, do you think we should include the name of the original poster? Or do you think the whole idea is a bad idea? Opinions please. :) We realize it would cause some drama, but AB isn't meant to be used as a bargaining chip like that, and it does a disservice to have valid posts deleted. But there might be an angle I'm not thinking of, so I'm asking you guys.

PS. This whole thing wouldn't apply to posts that we actually approve of being deleted. This happens extremely rarely as there are very few good reasons for a post to be deleted. But it wouldn't make a lot of sense if we approved a deletion and then just threw it back up again. This is just for posts that were valid and shouldn't have been deleted.

Comments

[maryseif.livejournal.com]

Excellent idea. I'd been wondering where that post ran off to...

[delphinios.livejournal.com]

Has OP's deleting their own posts become an issue, or is this a contingency plan "Just in Case"?

[kayla-la.livejournal.com]

It's very much been an issue. Usually it's either because A. The post is resolved so the person assumes it isn't needed anymore and deletes it, which is very much wrong, or B. The person the post is about threatens the poster that they won't get their art/fursuit/refund/small child/dodongos if they don't delete it. It's why Starfinder doesn't have more posts here, because she frequently demanded the poster took the post down, even though she's actually been posted here a lot.

Since AB is meant to be an archive/history so people can research, deleted posts is a real problem. Plus it leaves ghost tags, but that's just more annoying than anything.

Just had a post deleted today, even. It happens just often enough to be a problem.

[weirdmisty.livejournal.com]

I'm totally in support of this.

[phoenixsrequiem.livejournal.com]

YES! I was in the middle of re-reading a recent post about sugarpoultry, my browser refreshed accidentally and *poof* it was gone!
>.

[kayla-la.livejournal.com]

That was the post that kind of sparked me to make this post. I had been discussing the idea of the archive for a while now, but I'm so tired of posts being deleted that I really want to get a move-on for it. If this plan is approved by the majourity, including the other mods, it would essentially mean no posts can ever be truly deleted EVER, and that idea makes me really happy.

[poto-heart.livejournal.com]

I don't see a problem with it. Once a person makes a post a community, it no longer really belongs to them. Although I do wonder what you would do if the original post broke a rule? For example, say it's stuffed with insults aimed at the artist, or the OP was inciting people to harass the artist on their behalf, etc.? Would you edit the copy you put up? I just think it's something to think about and have figured out in advance, although obviously there would probably be case-by-case variations.

It's a good idea though. As you said, it would prevent a_b being used as a bargaining chip, and it also prevents the artists(/commissioners, in some cases) from trying to cover up after themselves.

[delphinios.livejournal.com]

I'd hope in that case, the mod leave the post intact, but would lock down the abusive post from any further comments, and add a moderators note explaining why and what disciplinary action occurred because of the abusive post.

[wildehund.livejournal.com]

I give this idea a big thumbs up.
The people we're supposed to be getting warned about shouldn't be given the ability to make the warning go away just by throwing a hissy-fit and threatening people.

[albinowolf.livejournal.com]

This

[silverfalln.livejournal.com]

Big thumbs up to this idea, and I was wondering what happened to that post about sugarpoultry.

[gel-wolf.livejournal.com]

agreeedddd. Or maybe possibly having mods who get the post that needs approving just copy-paste it and submit it themselves so no one but a mod can delete it. Since that means you wouldn't lose comments or anything

[beetlecat.livejournal.com]

Only downside there is the original submitter wouldn't be able to edit the post with new information/photos. true they could put it in comments but that may get overlooked.

[takshadowing.livejournal.com]

Huge thumbs up from me for this idea.

[snarky-fox.livejournal.com]

I think it's a good idea. ^^

[armaina.livejournal.com]

I'm all for it myself.

Also, any chance we can get comments re-posted too? (in the sense that someone replies with the comments that were supposed to be there) Maybe by screen cap of the comment or notification. I'm kind of tire seeing people delete whole chains of comments then feign ignorance so they can get off with a warning. There are a lot of people that know it's a rule and do it anyway because they'd rather deal with that than the comment staying up.

[kayla-la.livejournal.com]

If someone else took caps and reposted it, they're free to. But we honestly don't have the time to keep track of all comments for the purpose of reposting. That would have to be something left to the members, as there's only four of us mods and most of us either have jobs or are looking for jobs, etc.

[teahound.livejournal.com]

I like this idea!

[ph34rth3ll4m4.livejournal.com]

I love this idea. Every time I notice a deleted post, especially one where the artist in question was particularly nasty, I worry that the poster has been bullied.

[neoscottie.livejournal.com]

I think it would be a great idea!

[beetlecat.livejournal.com]

repost it here. 100%.

[harliquinnraver.livejournal.com]

i think its a fantastic idea. :)

[canis-ridens.livejournal.com]

I'm all for it. Screencaps help, but are wholly dependent on someone having the post open at the right time and the knowledge that it needs to be capped

[shadowedyoshii.livejournal.com]

Another voice in the chorus of "this is a good idea."

[pariahsdream.livejournal.com]

Definitely would like to see it if it's not too much work on the mods. I do wonder- what if the post that's deleted is one of those infamous ones where there's clearly only half a story being told? Do you repost it as is or would there be a note explaining more of the situation?

[kayla-la.livejournal.com]

It would probably be handled on a case by case basis. We can't give more info than we actually have, of course, but if we know something's up, we'll probably include it with the post.

[fyphfoko.livejournal.com]

the hanging eyeball aproves

in the example you gave, the artist should not get to blackmale chief random, in fact the blackmailing should be reported really. the resolved tag is there for a reason, as is the whole community

besides which, i was saving that post that got deleated, and had to find something else to do O.o

[greenreaper.livejournal.com]

The main issue (as I see it) is copyright. You have no right to re-post their post without their permission. It's like an Inkbunny mod saying "oh, you deleted that picture because the subject didn't like it? Too bad, I'm putting it up again."

I doubt saying "you waive your copyright if you post here" is going to fly with LJ if they file a support ticket.

[kayla-la.livejournal.com]

I think not posting the name of the original poster would essentially get around this. LJ has proven to be fairly hands off of these kinds of things unless personal information is given. Even if we did include the name, I don't think it would be too much of a problem. This isn't something that's going to be happening very often regardless, I hope.

Personally, I don't think the Inkbunny comparison is a very good one, but I'm too tired right now to really form a coherent argument as to why. I'll see if I can after I've had some sleep if I remember to.

[tysharina.livejournal.com]

I'm in support of this idea, the rules are clear about deleting posts.

[bladespark.livejournal.com]

PLEASE YES. It drives me crazy when a post vanishes!

[goosestep-lion.livejournal.com]

I say go for it!

[blackberrypie.livejournal.com]

I'm all for it! I hate when I remember a post, and go to look for it.. And its just not there anymore!! :C Its not beneficial to anyone who is coming here to check up on commissioners and artists they are about to do business with or need help with dealing with.