I’d argue that “Removing” is an alteration.

That aside, I think that we should keep deletions but make them more manageable, because newcomers and clutzes sometimes delete stuff because they derp. Also, policing deletions would be a drag.

I think that Cuddlebeam is correct. Even if you implicitly meant to exclude deletions from being an alteration, people would forget and in short need an explicit mention of it.

I don’t think there’s any reason something should be deleted, although the Ruleset should allow for the possibility. I don’t buy that a klutz deletes something because they “derp”

@Pokes: I mean that they delete stuff they do in error. I’m personally fail to login 3-4 times each time I try to access BN. Proposals and such in error isn’t a problem for me though, but I believe it could be for others.

Do you mean the action was in error or the deletion was an error? It’s not easy to delete something.

I just don’t like the idea of these loose take-backsies that deleting posts leads to. If someone accidentally posts some action, tough luck. It’s like taking your hand off the piece in chess.

Am in two minds on this. The tough-luck-chess makes sense for gameplay situations (the worst case perhaps being a story post action retracted after six hours, after others have responded to it), but sometimes you’re just sparing the other players from having to read and discuss a proposal that you immediately realised wasn’t ready or appropriate.

I’m in favour of making the deletion after >15 minutes or something illegal though.

If deleting it counts as altering it, then splitting the rule in altering and deleting doesn’t do anything.