in reply to Enforcing unreap

I would rather see effort spent toward allowing votes by three janitors to force reap or unreap a node, similar to the no longer available three-janitor nuke.

Or in testing castaway's consideration changes that have languished so long.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Enforcing unreap
by Arunbear (Prior) on Sep 29, 2005 at 20:38 UTC
    There is aleady editor_vote - (patch) that would enable janitorial reaping as you've described. What I'm trying to point out is that unreap on its own doesn't do much good unless there is a way to make it stick.

    Another idea that occurs to me is that whenever a reaped node is unreaped, we would record that in an unreaped table. Then we make a superdoc that shows any nodes in reapednode that were once unreaped, so janitors can unreap again.

    What do you think?
[reply]
Re^2: Enforcing unreap
by castaway (Parson) on Sep 29, 2005 at 20:44 UTC
    Yes, me too ;)

    My changes don't address this particular problem.. But it would be nice to get them in, since I was planning follow-up ones to the actual consideration system. (The current ones are more moderation/approval ones).

    C.

[reply]

In Section Inner Scriptorium