the original post has been replaced by this disclaimer
I hereby declare that, until such time as Clarity pledges to stop doing this, I am going to stop replying substantively to his/her comments. Anyone else with me on this?
Wow. I can stop doing it without you doing that pledge. Your recommendation is enough lol.
edit 1: wait unless you’re pledge is trying to change something else?
edit 2: for my understanding, why don’t you like the disclaimer idea? I would have adjusted or given up the practice based on upvotes/downvotes in response to gauge the communities reaction. But I feel like this is a strong individual preference against it?
In general content shouldn’t be delete unless there’s a very good reason to do so. Deleting it prevents other people from reading the discussion in full.
If you disown your article you can click on the button right next to edit to strike it out.
I hereby declare that, until such time as Clarity pledges to stop doing this, I am going to stop replying substantively to his/her comments. Anyone else with me on this?
Wow. I can stop doing it without you doing that pledge. Your recommendation is enough lol.
edit 1: wait unless you’re pledge is trying to change something else?
edit 2: for my understanding, why don’t you like the disclaimer idea? I would have adjusted or given up the practice based on upvotes/downvotes in response to gauge the communities reaction. But I feel like this is a strong individual preference against it?
All my pledge is trying to change is your annoying habit of deleting things that provide relevant context for other people’s comments.
(I did already recommend that you stop doing it, as it happens, so clearly that wasn’t enough :-). I explained why at the time.)
In general content shouldn’t be delete unless there’s a very good reason to do so. Deleting it prevents other people from reading the discussion in full.
If you disown your article you can click on the button right next to edit to strike it out.