I posted an apparently off-topic post to !foss@beehaw.org. The moderator removed it from the timeline because discussion about software that should be FOSS was considered irrelevant to FOSS. Perhaps fair enough, but it’s an injustice that people in a discussion were cut off. The thread should continue even if it’s not linked in the community timeline. I received a reply that I could not reply to. What’s the point in blocking a discussion that’s no longer visible from the timeline?

It’s more than just an unwanted behavior because the UI is broken enough to render a dysfunctional reply mechanism. That is, I can click the reply button to a comment in an orphaned thread (via notifications) and the UI serves me with a blank form where I can then waste human time writing a msg, only to find that clicking submit causes it to go to lunch in an endless spinner loop. So time is wasted on the composition then time is wasted wondering what’s wrong with the network. When in fact the reply should simply go through.

(edit) this is similar to this issue. Slight difference though: @jarfil@beehaw.org merely expects to be able to reply to lingering notifications after a mod action. That’s good but I would go further and propose that the thread should still be reachable and functional (just not linked in the timeline where it was problematic).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Penguincoder 11 points 9 months ago (4 children)

the UI is broken enough to render a dysfunctional reply mechanism.

100% Agreed, a lot of dysfunctional with regards to the UI and BE interoperability. I'll add your specific issue into my list of Lemmy annoyances to try and fix for Beehaw.

Removed threads should still be reachable and interactive

Personal opinion; Nope. Utterly no. Defeats the point of removing a topic from discussion. Difference between hidden and removed and even deleted. You want the first. Admin or mods removing a thread, should not be accessible to anyone else. Maybe a certain subset of admins for review/restoration as needed. But certainly not the public facing internet, where even if it's hidden on a timeline, a direct link still gives access to it. That should not be the case.

What’s the point in blocking a discussion that’s no longer visible from the timeline?

The point is in removing said 'discussion' from the platform. This is not censorship, this is how we keep the purpose of Beehaw inline with the ethos.

[–] remington 7 points 9 months ago

I agree with your reasoning here.

load more comments (3 replies)