The node I'm replying to was emptied (including the title) by the author, apparently in regret after several people replied stating that they couldn't understand it (and/or because a few people downvoted it).
See (tye)Re: why a nodelet can be kept against author wish? for a longer description of my position on such things. In short: We all make mistakes, there is no good reason to try to hide your mistakes. I often learn more from peoples' mistakes than from anything else. I appreciate seeing a mature correction when a mistake is discovered, leaving the original mistake visible (perhaps
with a line through it or such) so the replies below it make sense.
Deleting your node content is an immature act like "taking your marbles and going home" because you weren't winning. It leaves an ugly mark at the Monastery (replies suddenly with no context).
I have heard a lot of people express (usually strong) disapproval of such behavior and I don't think I've ever heard anyone praise it so, when I found the node had been quite quickly reaped (with a justification of simply "empty"), I wondered if those who voted for reaping realized that they were helping the author to try to "change history" and just make their mistake "go away" and, in doing so, were more likely to encourage future acts than to discourage them.
So I've unreaped the node for several reasons:
- I feel strongly that such nodes shouldn't be reaped
- I'm hoping to call attention to this problem and get more feedback on how it should be dealt with
- I feel it was reaped too quickly and worry that those who voted to reap it hadn't considered the consequences
- I want the original author to have the chance to change their mind and restore the node or at least insert a mature retraction in place of the sulking blankness
- I'd like to upvote the node (I haven't voted on it) once the author comes to his or her senses and makes a more mature and less rude update to it
- and, yes, I don't think the author should get off so easy (once a node is reaped, the author can no longer get or lose XP from votes against the node) if the author refuses to take the mature route
I'd also like to encourage people to not downvote the node. I'm sure it will get several more downvotes despite my request. But I'd rather give the author some time to recover from whatever emotions lead to this retraction and fix the mistake instead of compounding it. If too much time passes or the author makes it clear that they refuse to take the high road, then I will very much want to downvote the node. But I'll check Worst Nodes
first and not add to the dogpile if I think too big of one has already formed (which I sincerely hope doesn't happen).
I also don't think it is appropriate to approve an empty root node and such certainly shouldn't be front-paged. If attention needs to be called to such things on the front page, then a PM Discussion root node about it is what needs to be displayed there.
Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big>
<blockquote> <br /> <dd>
<dl> <dt> <em> <font>
<h1> <h2> <h3> <h4>
<h5> <h6> <hr /> <i>
<li> <nbsp> <ol> <p>
<small> <strike> <strong>
<sub> <sup> <table>
<td> <th> <tr> <tt>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in
<code> tags not
<pre> tags. In fact, <pre>
tags should generally be avoided. If they must
be used, extreme care should be
taken to ensure that their contents do not
have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent
horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor
Want more info? How to link
or How to display code and escape characters
are good places to start.