.

[Mutex]

.

[Ben Lubar]

locked means locked

unable to be modified

no awards, edits, deletes, new posts, etc.

[Ben Lubar]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Mutex:

Diposting pertama kali oleh Ben Lubar:

locked means locked

unable to be modified

no awards, edits, deletes, new posts, etc.

I would call that "freeze". But honestly, I don't care what every individual thinks the semantic meaning behind "locking" is. The primary intended functionality of this feature is to stop a thread from continuing, from being necro'ed. In other words "no new posts" and not "take posts hostage".

Locking a thread has meant you can't edit or delete posts in every forum software I have ever seen.

[William Shakesman]

I mean I don't see a reason why not at all but no forum has ever followed this paradigm you propose. Valve doesn't tend to innovate

[Ben Lubar]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Mutex:

Diposting pertama kali oleh Ben Lubar:

Locking a thread has meant you can't edit or delete posts in every forum software I have ever seen.

I get it. Some people are conservatives and some are progressives. But appeal to tradition is still just a fallacy and not a valid argument.

The fact that something has been done in a certain way for a long time doesn't necessarily mean it's the most effective or ethical way to do it.

And similarly, just because an idea is different doesn't mean it's good. There's a reason everyone agrees on what words mean in a specific context.

[BJWyler]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Mutex:

Diposting pertama kali oleh Ben Lubar:

Locking a thread has meant you can't edit or delete posts in every forum software I have ever seen.

I get it. Some people are conservatives and some are progressives. But appeal to tradition is still just a fallacy and not a valid argument.

The fact that something has been done in a certain way for a long time doesn't necessarily mean it's the most effective or ethical way to do it.

And likewise, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's not the most effective or an unethical way to do it.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Mutex:

Diposting pertama kali oleh BJWyler:

And likewise, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's not the most effective or an unethical way to do it.

Correct. So please bring your argument as to why you think the current form is more effective or ethical as the one I proposed.

You don't own the post.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Mutex:

Diposting pertama kali oleh SlowMango:

You don't own the post.

I do own it until the thread gets locked. Home come? That's why I used the word "inconsistency".

You don't.

Try deleting this thread. You won't have the option to because you don't own it.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Mutex:

Diposting pertama kali oleh SlowMango:

You don't.

Try deleting this thread. You won't have the option to because you don't own it.

I can edit it, delete the title, delete the text and delete my posts. I own it.

But you can't delete the thread.

[William Shakesman]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Mutex:

Diposting pertama kali oleh Ben Lubar:

And similarly, just because an idea is different doesn't mean it's good. There's a reason everyone agrees on what words mean in a specific context.

You still haven't brought a single argument as to why it's good/better to keep it the way it is.

Why? The only argument that matters is Valves.

If I were to actually guess what Valves argument would be it would be that it is a costly change likely to introduce bugs into their already ♥♥♥♥♥♥ forum software that
has not has a meaningful update in years so yours likely isn't gonna get them off their ass and work anyway.

There's nothing wrong with asking for it or the idea behind it but I don't think anyone is gonna wanna put in the effort to implement it.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Mutex:

Diposting pertama kali oleh SlowMango:

But you can't delete the thread.

I don't want to delete a thread. I want to retain the ability to delete my posts (comments).

The point being that you don't own the thread. Valve own's the thread. If they decide to lock it, then they can.

[Ben Lubar]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Mutex:

Diposting pertama kali oleh SlowMango:

You don't.

Try deleting this thread. You won't have the option to because you don't own it.

I can edit it, delete the title, delete the text and delete my posts. I own it.

If the thread was locked, you would not be able to edit the title, edit the text of any of your posts, or delete any of your posts. Why do two of these restrictions make sense to you but not the third?

[BJWyler]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Mutex:

Diposting pertama kali oleh BJWyler:

And likewise, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's not the most effective or an unethical way to do it.

Correct. So please bring your argument as to why you think the current form is more effective or ethical as the one I proposed.

Well, to start, ethics has nothing to do with it. There is no good nor evil in being able to, or unable to delete a public forum post. It is morally ambiguous.

Likewise one form is not any more effective or efficient than the other. However one can say that being able to edit or delete a post in a locked thread can remove or alter the context of the conversation of the thread and the reasons that caused it to be locked as well. It also becomes irrelevant when posts can be and are quoted, therefore making any changes to the forum architecture to allow changes pointless.

Ultimately, it would only allow bad actors to cover their tracks.

Diposting pertama kali oleh Mutex:

Diposting pertama kali oleh SlowMango:

You don't.

Try deleting this thread. You won't have the option to because you don't own it.

I can edit it, delete the title, delete the text and delete my posts. I own it.

Only because Valve allows you to do so. They can remove that ability at any time - such as when a thread is locked, or when one is forum banned. You do not own the content, Valve does.

[HikariLight]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Mutex:

Diposting pertama kali oleh SlowMango:

You don't.

Try deleting this thread. You won't have the option to because you don't own it.

I can edit it, delete the title, delete the text and delete my posts. I own it.

You own the post you made, not the thread.
These are PUBLIC discussion forums.
You can start the thread, but after so many replies the thread is no longer yours.
The forums belong to Valve, your in Valves space, so you have to follow Valves rules.

[Tito Shivan]

Last time Steam gave users the ability to delete stuff whenever they wanted it didn't turn out OK. Lots of useful information ended up being deleted.

[BJWyler]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Mutex:

Diposting pertama kali oleh BJWyler:

Ultimately, it would only allow bad actors to cover their tracks.

This is interesting. What is your interest in following someones tracks? Retaliation? To morally judge them? What does "bad" mean? That which doesn't align with your opinion? If anything, this is the ethical reason to allow older posts to be deleted, so ill intended people can't start a witch hunt.

I have no interest in following anyone's tracks. Seems you are doing a lot of projection here. There are several contexts under which someone could be considered a bad actor, depending on the forum. And if someone is concerned about witch hunts, then perhaps they should reflect upon what they are posting, and where they are posting it to make that such a concern.