I would just like to register my preference that those who retract comments leave the original text in place. In most cases, I believe the retraction itself serves the purposes of retraction pretty well, whereas replacing the text is sort of overkill and detracts from the conversation.
treatable mental illness (i.e. if he would just have talked to us)
It’s not that simple. Sometimes the illness is perfectly treatable, but in practice you’re never able to get treatment before you die, unless one of the people you talk to goes far beyond the call of duty and drops their whole life to help you get treatment and magically divines how and when to help instead of behaving like a bull in a china shop and making everyone else terrified of mentioning depression.
It seems I am too incompetent to make myself understood.
I would just like to register my preference that those who retract comments leave the original text in place. In most cases, I believe the retraction itself serves the purposes of retraction pretty well, whereas replacing the text is sort of overkill and detracts from the conversation.
I generally agree, but I can see the point of making an exception in cases such as disclosure of confidential information, potential basilisks, etc.
Agreed.
It’s not that simple. Sometimes the illness is perfectly treatable, but in practice you’re never able to get treatment before you die, unless one of the people you talk to goes far beyond the call of duty and drops their whole life to help you get treatment and magically divines how and when to help instead of behaving like a bull in a china shop and making everyone else terrified of mentioning depression.
Oh, for Pete’s sake! I understand you were describing a view you don’t share, I was just pointing out middles in the dichotomy.