Well, this post has now been voted down to −5, but it’s still showing as “0” and it hasn’t disappeared off the “Recent Posts” header. This is probably not the behavior we want, I think?
Mmm… I’d probably want stuff to not disappear from new/recent posts, even if voted down. Instead, let them fall out of the popular (and fall lower in the promoted list, if a promoted one ended up being voted down that much)
ie, to me, new/recently posted means just that, a non filtering list of simply “what was posted recently”, while things like “popular” and so on are more appropriate places for such filtering to occur.
I’m not sure. Surely posts that have been voted down should still be visible to those of us who’d like to read even unpopular posts. Perhaps deletion is the right answer if it really is junk, as RichardKennaway suggests. However, bogus seems to be an actual user who makes reasoned contributions, so I’d hesitate to call it ‘spam’ or something.
I suggest the post be considered for deletion by the admins. It’s junk.
But perhaps bogus (ha!) has something to say. bogus, what is the provenance of that text, and why did you post it? According to Wikipedia, user “24” was banned for gross abuse, and “124″ is also under suspicion.
Well, this post has now been voted down to −5, but it’s still showing as “0” and it hasn’t disappeared off the “Recent Posts” header. This is probably not the behavior we want, I think?
Mmm… I’d probably want stuff to not disappear from new/recent posts, even if voted down. Instead, let them fall out of the popular (and fall lower in the promoted list, if a promoted one ended up being voted down that much)
ie, to me, new/recently posted means just that, a non filtering list of simply “what was posted recently”, while things like “popular” and so on are more appropriate places for such filtering to occur.
I’m not sure. Surely posts that have been voted down should still be visible to those of us who’d like to read even unpopular posts. Perhaps deletion is the right answer if it really is junk, as RichardKennaway suggests. However, bogus seems to be an actual user who makes reasoned contributions, so I’d hesitate to call it ‘spam’ or something.
Yes.
I suggest the post be considered for deletion by the admins. It’s junk.
But perhaps bogus (ha!) has something to say. bogus, what is the provenance of that text, and why did you post it? According to Wikipedia, user “24” was banned for gross abuse, and “124″ is also under suspicion.