Deleted post

[Jet Cash]

I've just had a message saying that one of my posts has been deleted. It was one about the proposed African Internet, but it still seems to be present. The message purports to come from "Bitcoin Forum" which is a guest account. I'm assuming that this was a scam message, and I'll delete it. I will also see if I can block messages from guests.

[bitbollo]

No, bitcoin forum isn't a scam/spam message. For what I know this can be blocked. You will receive such messages when some of your posts are deleted.
If this has been deleted by a forum moderator you will receive the following:

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

Otherwise I guess that your message has been deleted in a self-moderated thread?!

[JeromeTash]

Is the "Bitcoin Forum" clickable or not? If there is not clickable link then the message is genuine though I am not sure why they are sending it to you since the post is not yet deleted.

Perhaps it was deleted at first in the board you had posted but then it was later restored and moved to Bitcoin Discussion?

[Despairo]

It's because you post in a row, your post get merged with your first post, let me know if I was wrong with the post you refer to.


https://ninjastic.space/topic/5557735

[Jet Cash]

Ah, It looks as if that was the reason, and I can understand that. It would have been better if that could have been explained, as I got the hump over having a post deleted without providing a valid reason. I thought that this topic was interesting, and that is why I started the thread.

[Charles-Tim]

Ah, It looks as if that was the reason, and I can understand that. It would have been better if that could have been explained, as I got the hump over having a post deleted without providing a valid reason. I thought that this topic was interesting, and that is why I started the thread.

I have also seen deleted posts before, and I was shocked because I know it supposed not to be a post that should be deleted. I went to the post and I saw it. I decided not to bother about it because I know the moderators may mistakenly do something and later corrected it.

If someone posted consecutively, this can also cause it, but my post at the time was not consecutive without anyone posting.

[Churchillvv]

Basically if you make a post in a row and no reply has been made by another user, it is usually merged because it’s against the posting rules of the forum. It only means you should edit the first post and add the next post which you wish to post. Here!

32. Posting multiple posts in a row (excluding bumps and reserved posts by the thread starter) is not allowed.

[PowerGlove]

Ah, It looks as if that was the reason, and I can understand that. It would have been better if that could have been explained, as I got the hump over having a post deleted without providing a valid reason. I thought that this topic was interesting, and that is why I started the thread.

Lol @ "got the hump". Makes me chuckle.

I feel the same way you do about how rule #32 violations are handled.

Not that it helps you now, but, I made something a while ago (which was never added) that I think might have prevented your confusion:

I've been thinking for a while now that rule #32 violations (unnecessary consecutive posts) are handled pretty poorly... As I understand it, when posts like that are reported and moderators merge them together, the author gets notified that one (or more) of their posts were deleted, but they're not given a specific reason why, so they're unlikely to learn anything from the interaction. I remember when I had an early post of mine deleted by a moderator, it was a pretty confusing/deflating experience, and I was kind of left guessing at what was wrong with my post... I think that especially when it's for something that amounts to a very minor posting misbehavior, being left to figure out on your own what you did wrong is even worse. In fact, in this case, I think overzealous reporting might actually do more harm than good (that is, it's probably counterproductive in terms of the forum's health: for minor violations, the benefit of having a superficially cleaner forum is probably more than matched by the damage caused in making this place feel inhospitable).

Long-term, I'll make a patch to let moderators leave an optional reason for post deletion, which will hopefully make the general being-moderated experience less confusing/deflating (especially for newbies), but, for now, all I really have in mind are rule #32 violations (because I've been reporting quite a few of those lately, and I'm starting to feel like a douchecanoe for doing that, especially when you consider what I said in the previous paragraph). I think adding a warning against consecutive posts is a good thing to do (both to hopefully curb multi-posting, and to maybe reduce moderation busywork, along with providing users with at least some context for when they get notified that their posts are getting deleted/merged: after all, if they've been seeing and ignoring warnings given to them before they post, then they'll probably be able to correctly guess at what they've been doing wrong).

So, this patch adds the following warning when you're about to add another post to a topic that you're already the latest, recent (<24 hours) poster in:



(There's even a handy dandy link that takes you directly to the appropriate "Edit message" page.)

Here are the diffs for @theymos:

Code:

--- baseline/Sources/Post.php	2011-02-07 16:45:09.000000000 +0000
+++ modified/Sources/Post.php	2024-05-12 23:43:54.000000000 +0000
@@ -1080,24 +1080,40 @@
 		));
 
 	if (!empty($topic))
 		getTopic();
 
 	$context['back_to_topic'] = isset($_REQUEST['goback']) || (isset($_REQUEST['msg']) && !isset($_REQUEST['subject']));
 	$context['show_additional_options'] = !empty($_POST['additional_options']) || !empty($_SESSION['temp_attachments']) || !empty($deleted_attachments);
 
 	$context['is_new_topic'] = empty($topic);
 	$context['is_new_post'] = !isset($_REQUEST['msg']);
 	$context['is_first_post'] = $context['is_new_topic'] || (isset($_REQUEST['msg']) && $_REQUEST['msg'] == $ID_FIRST_MSG);
 
+	// Add a warning against consecutive posts. This logic is placed where it is (near the end of this function) mostly because it expects getTopic() to have already been called (when applicable).
+	if (isset($context['previous_posts']) && count($context['previous_posts']) > 0)
+	{
+		$previous_post = $context['previous_posts'][0];
+		$is_consecutive_post = $context['is_new_post'] && $previous_post['poster'] == $context['user']['name'];
+		$is_previous_post_recent = time() - $previous_post['timestamp'] < 86400;
+		$no_serious_error = empty($context['error_type']) || $context['error_type'] != 'serious';
+
+		if ($is_consecutive_post && $is_previous_post_recent && $no_serious_error)
+		{
+			$edit_post_url = $scripturl . '?action=post;msg=' . $previous_post['id'] . ';topic=' . $topic . '.0;sesc=' . $sc;
+			$context['post_error']['messages'][] = sprintf($txt['error_consecutive_post'], $edit_post_url);
+			$context['error_type'] = 'minor';
+		}
+	}
+
 	// Register this form in the session variables.
 	checkSubmitOnce('register');
 
 	// Finally, load the template.
 	if (WIRELESS)
 		$context['sub_template'] = WIRELESS_PROTOCOL . '_post';
 	elseif (!isset($_REQUEST['xml']))
 		loadTemplate('Post');
 }
 
 function Post2()
 {

Code:

--- baseline/Themes/default/languages/Post.english.php	2011-02-07 16:45:09.000000000 +0000
+++ modified/Themes/default/languages/Post.english.php	2024-05-12 23:47:12.000000000 +0000
@@ -148,10 +148,11 @@
 $txt['error_new_reply'] = 'Warning - while you were typing a new reply has been posted. You may wish to review your post.';
 $txt['error_new_replies'] = 'Warning - while you were typing %d new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.';
 $txt['error_new_reply_reading'] = 'Warning - while you were reading a new reply has been posted. You may wish to review your post.';
 $txt['error_new_replies_reading'] = 'Warning - while you were reading %d new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.';
 $txt['error_old_topic'] = 'Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least ' . $modSettings['oldTopicDays'] . ' days.<br />Unless you\'re sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.';
+$txt['error_consecutive_post'] = 'Warning: a recent post of yours is already the latest one in this topic.<br />Unless you\'re sure that a new post is necessary, please <a href="%s">add to your recent post</a> instead.';
 
 // Use numeric entities in the below sixteen strings.
 $txt['notification_reply_subject'] = 'Topic reply: %s';
 $txt['notification_reply'] = 'A reply has been posted to a topic you are watching by %s.' . "\n\n" . 'View the reply at: ';
 $txt['notification_sticky_subject'] = 'Topic stickied: %s';

[joker_josue]

Ah, It looks as if that was the reason, and I can understand that. It would have been better if that could have been explained, as I got the hump over having a post deleted without providing a valid reason. I thought that this topic was interesting, and that is why I started the thread.

Lol @ "got the hump". Makes me chuckle.

I feel the same way you do about how rule #32 violations are handled.

So there are three of us!

It confuses me how this "rule" is applied in many cases. To talk about the fact that when something like this happens, there is ZERO explanation.

There are many types of double posting: author error; misuse or lack of knowledge of how the forum works; separating information; sharing useful information without waiting for others to post first. In turn, everything seems to be treated as "author's error/bad intention" which is quite unpleasant. Especially when you are the OP of a topic, and you have to limit yourself, because of this "rule".

Anyway, that's how things are. This add-on could be useful to users, especially when they're doing it by mistake or are unfamiliar with how the forum works.

[Majestic-milf]

Ah, It looks as if that was the reason, and I can understand that. It would have been better if that could have been explained, as I got the hump over having a post deleted without providing a valid reason. I thought that this topic was interesting, and that is why I started the thread.

Maybe it wasn't deleted because it wasn't interesting or informative, but rather as @Despairo explained, you posted in a row so hence the removal. It really irks me that some posts get deleted without ample explanations and it would really go a long way if in the future such things are worked on.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Ah, It looks as if that was the reason, and I can understand that. It would have been better if that could have been explained, as I got the hump over having a post deleted without providing a valid reason. I thought that this topic was interesting, and that is why I started the thread.

Guess you haven't had many post deleted in your time here (and that's a good thing).  I definitely have, and there's never an explanation given--and yeah, it'd be nice if there was some kind of box the mods could check off that would make it into the PM they send you when you get a post deleted, but there isn't.  There's not likely to be either, because I've been seeing these "why was my post deleted?" threads ever since I joined the forum, so I don't think Theymos is thinking about implementing any changes.

We can still hope, though.

[hosemary]

It confuses me how this "rule" is applied in many cases.

I have reported such posts many times and my reports have always been marked as good.

Sometimes, there are good reasons for making multiple posts in a row and if that's the case they don't need to be deleted.
Below are some cases that come my mind.

• You are the topic creator and you want to reserve posts next to the topic.
• The content is too big and it can't fit into a single post.
• You have some new information or an update to post and the previous post has been made more than 24 hours ago.

[BitBakerr1]

The message you receive from Bitcoin Forum about a deleted post is not from scammers it is the forum and that his how they notify you when ever your message is deleted, I have received such message before however they really don't give a particular reason why your post was deleted this is what they always say and I quote "A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted" it will be more better if they identify directly the reason why the post is deleted it will help members know where they made a mistake and prevent themselves from making such mistakes again.

[joker_josue]

• You have some new information or an update to post and the previous post has been made more than 24 hours ago.

Does this mean that it is "forbidden" to release any relevant news about it in less than 24 hours?
Or an OP can't answer a user's question, and then make a relevant post about their project in less than 24 hours?

Things have to be much more comprehensive and not so strict.

To me, the only scenario where this rule makes sense is when a user responds to multiple users in different posts in succession. Or is clearly spamming.

Other than that, I don't see any other times when it makes sense to apply the rule.

[hosemary]

Does this mean that it is "forbidden" to release any relevant news about it in less than 24 hours?
Or an OP can't answer a user's question, and then make a relevant post about their project in less than 24 hours?

If the last post of the thread has been made by me and I want to make a new post in less than 24 hours, I would edit the last post instead and add the new information or the update to that post.
I think you can make a new post if the last post has been made more than 24 hours ago.

Read rule number 13:

13. Bumps, "updates" are limited to once per 24 hours per thread. Bumping multiple threads at the same time is allowed if it's not annoying.

[joker_josue]

Does this mean that it is "forbidden" to release any relevant news about it in less than 24 hours?
Or an OP can't answer a user's question, and then make a relevant post about their project in less than 24 hours?

If the last post of the thread has been made by me and I want to make a new post in less than 24 hours, I would edit the last post instead and add the new information or the update to that post.
I think you can make a new post if the last post has been made more than 24 hours ago.

Read rule number 13:

13. Bumps, "updates" are limited to once per 24 hours per thread. Bumping multiple threads at the same time is allowed if it's not annoying.

You know the difference between editing or a new post.

If people read a post, they don't get a notification again or the topic isn't highlighted again if that post is edited. Therefore, relevant new information may be lost.

Furthermore, you're confusing bump with information. I wasn't talking about bumps; I was talking about information relevant to a given project or topic.

As I said, things should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and not be the same for everything.

[DYING_S0UL]

It confuses me how this "rule" is applied in many cases.

I have reported such posts many times and my reports have always been marked as good.

Sometimes, there are good reasons for making multiple posts in a row and if that's the case they don't need to be deleted.
Below are some cases that come my mind.

• You are the topic creator and you want to reserve posts next to the topic.
• The content is too big and it can't fit into a single post.
• You have some new information or an update to post and the previous post has been made more than 24 hours ago.

Any idea what happens when someone deletes posts from the middle which makes your posts in a row!?
For example, I make the 1st post, then joker_josue makes the 2nd one and then again I make the 3rd one. Later he decides to delete his 2nd post!
Technically this automatically makes my posts a violation to the forum's rule! Does rule 32 still applies here?

[hosemary]

If people read a post, they don't get a notification again or the topic isn't highlighted again if that post is edited. Therefore, relevant new information may be lost.

You are right that you don't get any notification from third party tools like TryNinja's bot, but the topic title becomes bold if the last post of the thread is edited afer 10 minutes.

Furthermore, you're confusing bump with information. I wasn't talking about bumps; I was talking about information relevant to a given project or topic.

The rule number 13 refers to bumps and updates.
I may be wrong, but doesn't update mean new information about the topic?

As I said, things should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and not be the same for everything.

Right. Some cases may be different from some others.

For example, I make the 1st post, then joker_josue makes the 2nd one and then again I make the 3rd one. Later he decides to delete his 2nd post!
Technically this automatically makes my posts a violation to the forum's rule! Does rule 32 still applies here?

This has happened to me before.
I don't think moderators check if there was any post made by someone else before your second post and your posts will probably be merged/deleted, if they are reported.   

[joker_josue]

Furthermore, you're confusing bump with information. I wasn't talking about bumps; I was talking about information relevant to a given project or topic.

The rule number 13 refers to bumps and updates.
I may be wrong, but doesn't update mean new information about the topic?

Yes, but it shouldn't. They are different things.

It's one thing to make a post with the sole purpose of getting the topic back to the top. It's another to make a post to provide information that's truly and completely different from what was said before, and that's actually relevant.

Mainly service topics and the like have their own dynamics and should be analyzed accordingly, not in the same way as most other topics. That's what I'm basically saying.

[AVE5]

Is the "Bitcoin Forum" clickable or not? If there is not clickable link then the message is genuine though I am not sure why they are sending it to you since the post is not yet deleted.

I was also thinking because it's really a strange one. Haven posts deleted in the bitcointalk forum and have it restored is like eating your cake and getting it back. Or is there some functions of the forum that's untold? Well, the forum has been a verified reputable so for that I'll doubt if that incident was really of scam. Or should we say it's a system error from the Op's external tool notifier? I'm sure if it was scam the link will be clickable to take victim to the scammers server or or page and while the entire system maybe genuine, the link can though be clickable but can't take you to the deleted post since it doesn't exist anymore.