Re^2: Sorry I wanted to delete it

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Sorry I wanted to delete it by Anonymous Monk on Jul 28, 2014 at 20:52 UTC
That wasn't the point. From the linked page: Why shouldn't I delete a node or its content? PerlMonks is a place to learn. As often happens in real life, Perl Monks learn (and often learn best) from mistakes that they and others have made. If you make a mistake in a node and then delete it, you may be saving your pride but you are also depriving your fellow Monks of the chance to learn from the mistake. Only actual duplicates, spam, and obvious trolling should be deleted.	[reply]
Re^4: Sorry I wanted to delete it (delete node without replies) by Anonymous Monk on Jul 28, 2014 at 21:04 UTC
That wasn't the point...Why shouldn't I delete a node or its content?... Should is not must So the OP decided (for whatever reason decide), I don't need this question asked or answered, the node has no replies, but is considered restore -- in the past such nodes were reaped honoring the OPs wishes because there were no replies	[reply]
Re^5: Sorry I wanted to delete it (board rules) by LanX (Saint) on Jul 28, 2014 at 21:31 UTC
> So the OP decided ... Visitors don't decide about house rules. Cheers Rolf (addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)	[reply]
Re^6: Sorry I wanted to delete it (board rules deleting nodes without replies editing nodes) by Anonymous Monk on Jul 28, 2014 at 21:42 UTC
Re^7: Sorry I wanted to delete it (board rules deleting nodes without replies editing nodes) by Anonymous Monk on Jul 28, 2014 at 21:49 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^3: Sorry I wanted to delete it by GrandFather (Saint) on Jul 29, 2014 at 01:47 UTC
It looks like the OP didn't give the question very long to garner helpful replies and the OP doesn't say why the node was scrubbed. There was opportunity for (I think) a useful reply to the OP's question. I don't remember the topic of pre/post increment being dealt with in reply to a question and it is a potential trap for newbies so I've added a reply to that effect (and restored the node content to give the original context). Perl is the programming world's equivalent of English	[reply]
Re^4: Sorry I wanted to delete it (illusion of control) by Anonymous Monk on Jul 29, 2014 at 02:26 UTC
It looks like ... janitors decide, I get it :) But if you don't want users blanking the titles and node contents, or title going from many words to less words (or no words) ... ... remove the illusion of control over own nodes, esp for the noobs If you don't allow nodes to be blanked, node wouldn't be considered for restore :) Should be very easy to implement, compare size before/after, .... maybe Text::Diff to quantify drastic change Hey, you tried to delete the node title and node contents, that form of vandalism isn't allowed, update rejected, you can't unmail a letter Hey, you changed your node drastically, that form of vandalism isn't allowed, update rejected, you can't unmail a letter Hi	[reply]
Re^5: Sorry I wanted to delete it (illusion of control) by GrandFather (Saint) on Jul 29, 2014 at 02:39 UTC
Not so easy to detect actually. Sure, in the simplest case of delete everything, but otherwise there are legitimate changes that would look like vandalism. People are still generally better at this sort of pattern recognition than computers and given the small number of cases we get it's just not worth the effort to try and automate in some fashion. Perl is the programming world's equivalent of English	[reply]
Re^5: Sorry I wanted to delete it (control of illusion) by Anonymous Monk on Jul 29, 2014 at 04:06 UTC
At the simplest, the initiate (noob) filter could disallow all edits except prepend/append. Just an index test. Additionally, the edit page might feature a self-reap `[HIDE MY FOO]` button that wraps the text as spoiler, appends "Mea Culpa" for good effect.	[reply] [d/l]