Posters deleting threads after having their issue resolved

[Peter Paluch]

Hi everyone,

In the past few weeks, I have repeatedly come across a strange behavior of people seeking answers on CSC: They create a discussion, we join it, provide answers and guidance, often solving the original poster's issue, we perhaps even get rated, and suddenly the original poster deletes the entire thread along with all history and answers.

In my opinion, this behavior is mistaken and wrong on multiple accounts. First of all, it goes against the spirit of this community which is to share knowledge, experience and information so that the original poster - and many others along with him/her at the same time or afterwards - can be helped. By deleting a thread, no knowledge and experience can be shared and built upon, and the value of this community forum diminishes to zero, apart from being only exploited for knowledge which is then taken away. Second, doing so is insensitive and inconsiderate to the time, willingness, effort and expertise we have invested into helping the original poster in our free time and out of our good will. All of that simply goes down the sink if the entire thread is deleted. Some of our posts that have helped the original posters are, both in their informative value and their clarity, second to none, better than many textbooks or even official Cisco documentation. If such a thread is deleted, an immense value is irrevocably lost.

I understand that some fresh posters on CSC can be somewhat intimidated by the fact that their apparently complex problem turned out to be a trivial one after being properly explained. However, that is truly not a cause for any concern, nor should these posters be ashamed of it. They had troubles solving it in the first place, so it was relevant to them, and it can be relevant to many other people having the same starting point. The sole fact that an issue shows to be crystal clear after being properly explained is not a reason to delete the entire thread as irrelevant.

Therefore, I believe that the rules that dictate when and how a thread can be deleted on CSC should be tightened down. I have two personal alternative suggestions, one being strict, the other being more lenient.

The strict rule: Once an original post that started a new discussion has been replied to, the entire thread cannot be deleted.

The lenient rule: A thread cannot be deleted if at least one of the following conditions is true:

1. An answer in the thread has been rated
2. An answer in the thread has been marked as correct
3. An answer in the thread has been endorsed, either by Cisco, or by a Designated VIP

Which of these two alternatives would you prefer? Could either of them be implemented?

Best regards,
Peter

[Jon Marshall]

I would just like to add my support for Peter's suggestion.

It has happened to me a number of times as well and it is somewhat frustrating especially if you have spent a certain amount of time solving the problem.

Jon

[Jonathan Schulenberg]

I also want to add my support to Peter's request. I even had a thread author private message me today expressing gratitude for my help in solving their problem and that he has since deleted the entire thread. In that case - which was a complicated SIP ringback scenario - TAC even uncovered a bug which the author messaged me privately where it will help exactly no one else.

It's extremely discouraging to spend my personal time on CSC under the premise that it will help others and to then hear that the answer has been lost to the bit bucket.

Only a moderator should be able to delete or modify a thread once a response has been given.

[Pamela White]

The problem was not solved in the thread that I deleted and, I deleted it before we had the solution from Cisco.  I had briefly looked at the data I was posting and did not realize until later that there was identifying information in it.  That is when I deleted it.  I did not delete the solution, just one troubleshooting reply to it.

I also just reposted the issue and the solution.  This is the first time I deleted anything and didn't like doing it either.  I know that I searched for weeks for the solution and it would have helped immensely had I been able to find it anywhere on these forums.

[Dan Lukes]

Although I fully understand your arguments, I'm not with you in full. Especially because you mentioned Feedback Forum. I often use [ DELETE ] for a reason (in my humble opinion). here.

There are so many threads of the "problem report" kind. E.g. something like "there's broken icon on page XY" with only comment "Corrected, thanks". There's no value to keep those threads here for future readers. They pollute the FF community so it's so hard to find those few thread carrying informations of perpetual value.

Of course, not all threads on Feedback Forum are of such temporary-value-only kind.

As a example, I see no reason to keep CSC appears to confuse me for Rick Burts or Off-by-one bug in people listing threads, but I only believe in statistics that I doctored myself should survive because it contain valuable informations - the description how rating system is designed.

Not speaking about forum like VIP Moderation Request. - it is pure request->completed->deleted only forum.

On those forums unlimited [ DELETE ] should be retained. But even on experts forum there's good reason to delete thread sometime.

To answer your question - from those two variants you provided the second one is more acceptable to me.  But I'm not fan of this kind of restriction now.

You are proposing to limit power of all those experts as well as polite users just because few users are not polite and misuse the power. I wish it's moderator's job and responsibility to make final decision in the case of dispute.

I don't welcome ad-hoc changes of global rules unless a issue become so common to be solved on case-by-case basis by moderator. I don't feel we crossed such line yet.

[Peter Paluch]

Hi Dan,

Thanks for joining in.

Although I fully understand your arguments, I'm not with you in full. Especially because you mentioned Feedback Forum. I often use [ DELETE ] for a reason (in my humble opinion). here.

I am sorry - I am not following you on this one. I did not mention any forum, and certainly not the Feedback Forum. The first time the word feedback appears in this entire thread is in your own post.

There are so many threads of the "problem report" kind. E.g. something like "there's broken icon on page XY" with only comment "Corrected, thanks". There's no value to keep those threads here for future readers. They pollute the FF community so it's so hard to find those few thread carrying informations of perpetual value.

I do not think that my request is really relevant to these types of forums. They are more related to running and housekeeping of the entire CSC, not answering networking-related questions, and here, I don't mind if my bug report is eventually scrapped after it has been dealt with and after I have expressed my agreement with deleting it. In fact, this should be implemented more like a Bugzilla rather than a forum - but we're using the forum backend for two different things, hence the difference in approach! Even you are effectively saying the same: You want some threads evicted from FF as they don't carry any value after being taken care of, while some others maintain their value even after solving the issue, and you have explicitly voiced the wish for those threads to stay.

But I do not believe that it is a fair use of this forum if someone opens a discussion, gets assistance and advice, and then deletes it. This way of using the forum reduces it to a personal consulting service or a TAC - and mind you, these are usually royally paid. With this kind of approach, having a forum such as CSC effectively makes no sense.

Not speaking about forum like VIP Moderation Request. - it is pure request->completed->deleted only forum.

I am sorry, I do not know this forum at all. What is it?

You are proposing to limit power of all those experts as well as polite users just because few users are not polite and misuse the power.

Excuse me - how am I limiting the power of all experts here on CSC even if this suggestion is implemented? The experts have never had the privilege of deleting other users' threads, so how is this going to limit their powers? Throughout my time on NetPro/CSC, and it's been some years already, I cannot recall one instance of an expert deleting his/her own thread even if it was not answered - and that is a good thing, because often, even the original question itself was worthy of giving a thought! I do not see any limitation here - quite the contrary, I am seeking to preserve the comprehensive value experts have invested into answering those threads.

I don't welcome ad-hoc changes of global rules unless a issue become so common to be solved on case-by-case basis by moderator.

A thread can currently be entirely removed by the owner of the starting post without a moderator involvement. How can the moderator help in this case, then, after the thread has been already deleted? Shouldn't that also incur the change of global rules?

Best regards,
Peter

[Dan Lukes]

The first time the word feedback appears in this entire thread is in your own post.

So sorry, my sentence should be "... you mentioned it in Feedback Forum".

I do not think that my request is really relevant to these types of forums.

So I misunderstood you. You mentioned no community, so I assumed you are proposing global change of CSC behavior.

do not believe that it is a fair use of this forum if someone opens a discussion, gets assistance and advice, and then deletes it.

With no doubt. I agree with it. I just don't agree with your proposal. Off-topic comments, unsolicited advertising, personal offense, dirty words - and  other cases of forum misuse, including the one you mentioned, are sovereignty of particular forum moderator. Unless an issue become so common to be solved on case-by-case basis by moderator I see no reason to take other countermeasures.

how am I limiting the power of all experts here on CSC even if this suggestion is implemented

Some issue analysis are long and contain several dead paths. The resulting discussion is hard to read and understand, especially for non-experts. I wish that sometime it better to ask author to delete original thread, place the same question again, then respond with summarized response describing the analysis process (including dead paths, but with no deep-in details about  topics found not to be related to issue) as well as solution. Those "simulated discussions" are less authentic than the original one, but more valuable to future readers.

Yes, it take time, and yes, it require cooperation from thankful questioner. I did it, although not so often.

You may consider it not so important.  Even I can resign it if necessary. I just wish there is other solution good enough requiring no new restrictions affecting all.

Well, as day passed, I still consider bad idea to introduce new global restrictions affecting all users whenever few rogue users do something unsuitable. I feel better in communities with rules based on common sense with live moderator, despite danger of occasional rogue users activities than those cold and sterile one with rules enforced by silicon controller. In the fact, the later one I don't consider "community". But I'm aware it's rather matter of emotions and personal value system than matter of logical arguments. So it seems I will be unable to argue it. 

am sorry, I do not know this forum at all. What is it?

It's related to this program. 

How can the moderator help in this case, then, after the thread has been already deleted? Shouldn't that also incur the change of global rules?

I can't believe the DELETE mean "lost forever with no way to recover because of single man - either casual user or moderator - request". Content should be un-deletable because of many good reason.  And it is in most similar systems I know.

If DELETE is unrecoverable - e.g. no way to recover even if content has been deleted unintentionally or by engine bug, and no way to dispute if used intentionally (either by user or moderator) then I consider it severe system design failure. And I'm very surprised because of it.

[Peter Paluch]

Hi Dan,

So sorry, my sentence should be "... you mentioned it in Feedback Forum".

Of course I mentioned it here in Feedback Forum - this is the forum for all things related to CSC operation and housekeeping, right? I believe this is the best place for this discussion - properly placed and accessible to everyone.

So I misunderstood you. You mentioned no community, so I assumed you are proposing global change of CSC behavior.

I am proposing a global change. As I indicated earlier, this particular forum - the Feedback Forum - has a rather specific status because it is used more like a bug-tracking system that truly does not benefit from keeping the content forever, so yes, I can see selected areas on CSC being exempted from my suggestion. However, for the expert areas (or forums) of CSC, my suggestion holds.

Off-topic comments, unsolicited advertising, personal offense, dirty words - and  other cases of forum misuse, including the one you mentioned, are sovereignty of particular forum moderator.

I am not suggesting to infringe on the rights of the CSC administrators and moderators. They should, like always, be able to modify and remove any content. I am, however, proposing a rule to tighten down the privileges of ordinary posters.

Unless an issue become so common to be solved on case-by-case basis by moderator I see no reason to take other countermeasures.

I do not see how a deleted thread can be recovered by a moderator, for two primary reasons:

1. Once it is deleted, I assume it is deleted for good. No one has ever mentioned that there is an undelete function so I am not hoping for it.
2. Even if there was an undelete function, there is no way for an expert to track all threads he/she has been involved in, and should they be deleted by the original poster, ask the moderator to reinstate them.

A moderator simply is not the solution.

Some issue analysis are long and contain several dead paths. The resulting discussion is hard to read and understand, especially for non-experts. I wish that sometime it better to ask author to delete original thread, place the same question again, then respond with summarized response describing the analysis process (including dead paths, but with no deep-in details about  topics found not to be related to issue) as well as solution.

Why should that discussion be deleted even if it got too lengthy and ended up in several dead ends? The original poster can always start a new thread and just abandon the old one. Deleting the old thread, however, deprives all others of knowing that the dead ends exist in the first place, and of the mental paths to discover that these ends are dead. I am saying it again: Just because someone, anyone, does not see a value in the thread does not mean that the thread is objectively worthless. Who is to say that a thread can be deleted because it did not produce a workable solution in a limited number of posts?

I still consider bad idea to introduce new global restrictions affecting all users whenever few rogue users do something unsuitable.

If I discovered a vulnerability in the CSC code that happens not to be misused only because our users are generally polite, should that vulnerability not be reported and patched?

I don't think my proposal is that different, although here, we're dealing with the content of these forums and its protection, not with their code infrastructure. I truly consider the possibility of deleting an answered thread by the original poster a vulnerability.

And as Rob pointed out (Rob, thank you!), this is not even a new restriction - rather, it is a return to something we had here before, and what I didn't even know was in place (because I've never felt limited by it).

But I'm aware it's rather matter of emotions and personal value system than matter of logical arguments. So it seems I will be unable to argue it. 

Perhaps, but I believe many rational arguments have been presented. Ultimately, this boils down to how others perceive the usability of this suggestion and to what extent they truly feel to be limited and not helped anymore by it.

Best regards,
Peter

[Terry Cheema]

Peter/Rob and All

I have experienced this few times as well, thought of raising it but somehow ended up not doing that. But since Peter has raised this thought I would raise the voice as well :)

As you have mentioned even the answers get selected then mysteriously post disappears and sometimes it goes right away as soon as the answer is provided.

And I am only talking abut posts in the relevant sections only so definitely not deleted by moderators for being in the wrong section.

If someone has posted any sensitive information, they can always go back and edit the post. The idea of deleting entire thread certainly suggests intentional misuse happening here - and if possible should be addressed.

-Terry

[Dan Lukes]

there is no way for an expert to track all threads he/she has been involved in, and should they be deleted by the original poster, ask the moderator to reinstate them.

It is not necessary. The "Activity" tab of your personal profile is dedicated for tracking. Yes, it's buggy right now (there's still so many bugs in CSC engine) so your's activities related to dropped threads drop as well once thread become deleted.   It's broken behavior. Drop of thread doesn't nullify my previous activity on it. This bug should be corrected. Also, of I'm following a thread, I should be notified the thread has been deleted. It doesn't work correctly as well.

Not counting current pending bugs, you should be aware about thread deletion, thus you can protest against. 

it is a return to something we had here before

Yes and no. In old CSC we have no power to delete thread (with exception), but we have power to delete particular thread comment including related subtree regardless of authorsip of comments contained in subtree. 

I have nothing against your proposal if this behavior will return first. I used power to delete in old CSC system and I would like save power to delete even with current system.

I have nothing against to return behavior back to old CSC era, but you propose only partial return - so neither old CSC nor new CSC kind of power to delete will be available. It's why I'm complaining about the proposed change.

If I discovered a vulnerability in the CSC code that happens not to be misused only because our users are generally polite, should that vulnerability not be reported and patched?

;-)

My English skills are not sufficient for such kind of philosophical dispute, but I can't withstand the chance to take it. Consider to ignore the following part at all.

<philosophical_dispute>

So, are you claiming freedom of decision to be CSC bug?

Any power the man have can be misused, so even in this case rogue users can misuse the power to delete.  I see it no ultimate reason to remove particular power. May be I still trust in overall community spirit. Regardless few rogue individuals.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. We may remove more and more power to decision to avoid particular power misuse. But I feel discomfort with every step including the first one. You may feel it different. It's no "better/worse opinion" scenario. I claimed already it's matter of feeling ...

</philosophical_dispute>

[Rob Huffman]

Hi Peter & all,

I believe the way this worked on the previous CSC platform (Jive) was that the OP could not delete the thread once it had been responded to. This behavior seems to align with the "strict rule" as suggested by Peter which seems completely fair in my opinion. To have relevant threads disappearing once members have taken the time to respond seems to be a huge steps backwards and somewhat defeats the whole purpose of CSC.

Just my 2 cent$

Cheers!

Rob

[Dan Lukes]

It seems I'm overruled, so last attempt to defend my position. Just few numbers.

There's 392 delete and 700 "move to ..." pending requests now. The moderators team has processed 90 requests in past 30 days or 17 in past 7 days. So it take months until request to delete will be processed by moderator.

We should not remove the power to delete from authors, the only current effective moderators, assuming the job will be taken by someone who's unable to take it.

We can restrict power to delete to moderators only as long as there are moderators that will process user's requests in reasonable time. It's neither true just now nor it seems to change in mid-term future.

[Jon Marshall]

Dan

You are missing the point.

You are arguing if the author of the post cannot delete them who will ie. the moderators cannot act quickly enough.

Peter and the rest of us are arguing that a post that contains a valuable answer should not be deleted by either the author, a moderator, or anyone else.

It's a totally different thing we are talking about here.

If it is a choice between Peter's suggestion which may mean some useless posts are left on the site or your suggestion which means we may lose valuable information then I would choose the latter.

Jon

[Dan Lukes]

No, it seems I'm still unable to express the matter.

I consider moderator as last instance. So I prefer the users will be able to delete their posts or even complete threads, but if someone feel bad from it, then he will be able to dispute such action and moderator may decide to revert it. As no one provided numbers, I assume we are speaking about just few misdeleted threads per month, isn't it ?. 

You call the moderator become the only instance.

In neither case we speak about useless post remain left forever nor valuable information will be lost forever. In first case we are speaking about useless remain left for few weeks, but mainly, we are going to express distrust to community members. In second case the valuable information may become inaccessible for a while. Nothing more. OK, I assume that even underpowered moderator's team can process few cases per month in reasonable time.

It's not only I wish the expressed lack of trust to users will damage the community spirit - such feeling is matter of previous experience and personality, e.g. subjective. There's also less spiritual reason - just the amount of moderators work. Current moderator team is overloaded badly. So I don't welcome any proposal that transfer a job that can be done by casual community members to exclusive sovereignty of moderator as I wish it will not work good. Moderator team may prioritize few "resurrect" requests over other request. But no way to prioritize "delete" request over all those 400 delete requests already pending here. I wish my proposal mean less work to moderators including occasional dispute related to misused delete power.

Remember I already claimed unacceptable behavior the current DELETE is irreversible action. Power to do irreversible action should be granted to no one - including moderators. Saying "delete" I mean action similar to Jive's DELETE. As far as I know, it's known as "unpublishing" on Drupal. Such action can be reverted easily once disputed by (re-)publishing of the unpublished content.

But I need not to win all battles (nor I feel it's the battle with winner and looser). ;-)

Just trying to express and defend my (different) opinion. The final decision is not mine and I will accept even other's solution.

[nspasov]

Hi Peter-

I fully support your idea here. This has happened to me on multiple occasions. I agree that if the thread was created by mistake or it was duplicate then the author should be able to delete but. However, if the thread was marked as correct and/or if there has been rating then moderators would have to approve the deletion. 

Neno