Closed dgilge closed 5 years ago
Some notes on the privileges:
Use a numbered list, it's easier to answer:
Lukas: [comment was hidden bei maintainer]
, which is useful for inappropriate comments, but delete
may serve the same purpose.Ok. I think it's important to use commonly understood terms. This is why I have these questions...
(Numberd list doesn't reflect your numbering.)
delete translation is really just an edit that removes all the text. Or do you mean removing a history object
? In this case we should handle it like git, that deleting is not possible ... except, again, for content with unclean language.
Edit: "Email replies do not support Markdown" :(
Ha, deleting historical records... That gets interesting. I think we'll come back to that later.
But I was actually refering to segments. Yes, deletion of a translation is actually just removing the text with one difference: I'd say it always creates an own historical record (which hasn't any text, but another change reason). I think it's not so easy to implement it if we don't have a separate API endpoint for deletion (which is implemented already) using the current segment and history handling.
But after all it's your task to make the UI and if you don't see a fitting place for deletion I can remove the endpoint.
Restoring also always produces it's own historical record, doesn't it?
Why should flagging require such high reputation if users don't see it? I mean actually everybody should be albe to report abuse... And I think it should cost a lot more than 5 points. I mean you risk your account when you abuse the platform.
I like approve but what I didn't think of is downvote. If we change upvote we should change downvote, too. What about disapprove or decline?
Yes, deletion of a translation is actually just removing the text with one difference: I'd say it always creates an own historical record
That's what I meant
Restoring also always produces it's own historical record, doesn't it?
Yes
I mean actually everybody should be albe to report abuse
Good point, I think you are right
What about disapprove or decline?
disapprove, then it is consistent
Thanks for your quick responses @lhermann . I've updated the document to reflect our discussions. (Every comment with a ❤️ is now a part of the document.)
I kept flag because can report comment might not be specific enough.
I'm not sure how much permissions trustees and repsonsible entities should have... Right now only the reputation counts. But we probably should change that.
Great! So you can can merge.
Permissions for trustees is a separate issue
One more thing:
-1 | Another version is restored
We probably want to specify that to avoid punishing "innocent" people with every restore. Maybe only limit this penalty to an action restoring particularly the edits of one person. as in: Edit A - Edit B - Restore A
--> B gets penalty
Alternatively: Edit A - Edit B - Edit C - Edit D - Restore A
--> B, C and D get penalty
And what if the restored version gets restored? Edit A - Edit B - Restore A - Restore B
?
So you can can merge.
I actually wanted to discuss much more in this PR, especially score details.
Edit A - Edit B - Edit C - Edit D - Restore A
--> B, C and D get penalty
I agree doing it that way.
And what if the restored version gets restored?
Good point. We should restore the reputation, too.
I imagine the whole restoring of reputation can get quite complicated, doesn't it? But it's your part :)
Sure, go ahead, what other points should we tackle?
I changed my mind and I think we'll discuss when to gain and loose reputation and how much in another issue…
But since we decided to allow empty drafts we should change the delete minimum from 150 to 3.
Yes, we should
great! You can merge now.
I merge this now to be able to do our homework. ;)
And you merged it right into master ... so then we have to merge from master back into staging I guess.
There is no staging in this repo ;)
Decisions to make: