Time limit option to delete posts?

[ArielTrafford]

One of the features I need the most is the ability to set up a time limit for users to delete their posts. As of now we have the option to set up the time limit to edit posts but not delete posts. Why we can't set up the time to delete posts too? I need to let people to be able to delete posts - within a certain amount of time. The way this is set up now I can either let them delete posts or not. If I set it up so that users can delete posts then there is not time restriction - this means that once someone receives a warning he could delete all his posts. I have seen this happening in the past. People getting mad and in an hour or so "wiping down" a few thousand posts they had written. Is there any chance we will have this option? If we can set up the time limit to edit posts, why can't be set up the time limit to delete posts?

[Rheddy]

I don't allow the members on my community to delete their posts, although I do allow them to edit. While you can allow users to delete their posts, I grant that ability to my moderators, not the rank and file users.

[ArielTrafford]

I just want to let them delete their posts but with a time restriction, probably one or two days or maybe a few hours so that they do not have to ask the mods. The problem is that I can set up the feature if there is no time restriction available. Someone could delete all the posts he posted in the last 3 or 4 years this would be such a pain

[Rheddy]

That's why I leave content deletion only for my forum staff. It just opens your community for abuse if you don't have a restriction that should be strictly a "moderator" only function. Otherwise, what good are moderators for. I'm already considering a time limit for 'post editing' for my members when IPS4 is released.

[ArielTrafford]

That's why I leave content deletion only for my forum staff. It just opens your community for abuse if you don't have a restriction that should be strictly a "moderator" only function. Otherwise, what good are moderators for. I'm already considering a time limit for 'post editing' for my members when IPS4 is released.

Thanks for your opinion regarding this. What I still can't figure out is the reason why the software offers the time restriction to edit posts but not to delete them. We should have the option for both of them. Regarding "what mods are for" since they all work and do other things I try to set up things in a way so that they are not bothered if there is no need, in the case I am pointing out the forum users would not need to bother the mods if we could have the time restriction option because the users could delete posts themselves. At least this would drastically reduce the number of times the forum users need help.

Regards

[Rheddy]

The option to delete content is exclusive to upper management level accounts, meaning admin and moderators. I doubt that the feature was ever intended to be an ability for members. While message editing is available to members, if you give your members the ability to delete their own posts, it just makes the moderators a redundant position.

Personally, I don't want the delete option to be available to members because of that fact.

[ArielTrafford]

What's the place to post so that IP Board staff can see the request?

[bfarber]

I've already seen this feedback topic (like every other one posted in this forum) :)

[GreenLinks]

We also would love this option.

By the way allowing content deletion to content creator is another weird EU requirement

[Rheddy]

Seriously? The EU has so many restrictions. The only EU requirement I have placed on my site is a pop-up message regarding 'cookies'. I don't make it a habit of allow my members to delete any content on the forums. The only time content is deleted from my community is if it violates the forum rules. I don't engage in censorship on my forums and allowing my members to delete their own content is a form of censorship.

For instance, say an EU citizen created a topic and then wanted to delete their first post that created that topic; it would affect every post within that topic. Not only that, but it changes the entire context of the topic when the originating post is deleted.

Many sites have this policy against deleting any content unless it's a takedown request persuant to the DMCA, if it's copyrighted content that's asked to be removed or if it involves posted content that violates my site's polciies or my webhost provider's ToS.

[Makoto]

Quite honestly there are so many ridiculous EU policies being pushed I'm not even sure which you are specifically referring to GreenLinks.

There's a "right to be forgotten" now that the EU is pushing, but that's mainly targeted at Google. (Because the EU apparently doesn't acknowledge the many websites that offer background checks as a threat, for whatever reason)

Whatever it is though, at worst it should only require you to remove content at a users request, there shouldn't need to be an automated method available to the user as a requirement. It would (in my opinion) be better to handle these on a case by case basis.

But that may not be how you'd prefer to handle it. I think a time restriction on being able to delete topics could definitely be useful as a general function.

[Jυra]

I suppose it makes sense to have since we already have it for editing. I would likely use it. I see no issues with it since you could just make the limit however long or short you want it.

[Rheddy]

I think many are forgetting that most of these EU laws aimed at websites are mainly for company, corporation, social media and business websites. I don't think that these pertain to personal websites.I only include the cookie acknowledge message because I thought it was important that visitors and members of my community should be aware of that.

[Makoto]

I only include the cookie acknowledge message because I thought it was important that visitors and members of my community should be aware of that.

No everyday user should care that your website uses cookies. Almost every single modern dynamically powered web page on the face of the internet utilizes cookies in some way today. If the user doesn't like it, they can block cookies, or use add-ons that prompt to allow a webpage to store cookies.

I think many are forgetting that most of these EU laws aimed at websites are mainly for company, corporation, social media and business websites.

None of the laws, as far as I am aware, are specific to commercial websites in any way. Things like the cookie law, however, are largely unenforceable anyways.

[Jυra]

I've moderated on a forum that allowed users to soft delete and never had problems. I would say it even made work easier for moderators. Obviously would make it shorter if it hard delete, but still.

IPB has gone this long without having post editing history. If a post is wiped then it's wiped even without deletion.

[opentype]

What I still can't figure out is the reason why the software offers the time restriction to edit posts but not to delete them.

Because those are very different things. Editing recent posts helps to correct typos or other minor mistakes. Deleting posts makes whole threads pointless and is then usually a slap in the face of those other users who have participated. So it's often better to not allow deleting posts in the first place.

[Jυra]

Deleting posts allows users to self-moderate if they decide not to cause trouble or remove their reply if the whole post they wrote up was a mistake from misreading as examples. Could make it not possible to delete if someone replies.

[GreenLinks]

I honestly don't understand why American's dislike EU cookie policy. Do you really want companies, governments follow every action you do ?

Yes the cookie technology is out for decades now however most web masters try taking advantage of it and was storing way more information any regular user notice. This law is designed to protect us and i am extremely happy with it. Yeah it creates additional work for every webmaster but this is a required law. Look at NSA and how it is monitoring US citizens at least we know our governments will not spend zillions of money on tracking your activity.

[Makoto]

The cookie law does absolutely nothing to protect you and you're silly if it think it actually does.

If you want actual "protection," use a browser plugin that prompts you to accept or reject cookies.

I'm no sure why you think it's just Americans that acknowledge the policy is ridiculous, because it's certainly not.

[Jυra]

The EU could have instead made policy of raising awareness. Those users still have those cookies and nobody benefited from the law. The EU could have even developed browser plugins (or something similar) themselves. I don't see what this has to do with the NSA.

[Makoto]

Editing my post does not in any way invalidate my point Ryan, I find it bemusing that you actually felt the need to so. I posted a non-offensive image, and just because I mentioned that loading the image stored a cookie, you felt that you needed to edit the post. Really? That's utterly absurd, but okay.

I could embed an invisible 1x1px image into my signature that sends out tracking cookies and you would never know.

The same can be said for members on your forum. Or any website anywhere that allows embedding of remote images period.

Regardless, this is off-topic. Let's not turn this into a discussion on why the EU is technologically ignorant, the OP here is just making a general suggestion.

Which I think is a good suggestion and still do support. But not for the sake of any ridiculous EU law.

[opentype]

The EU could have instead made policy of raising awareness.

Well, that is exactly what the law does. It actually enforces the awareness, so user tracking cannot happen secretly anymore.

Those users still have those cookies and nobody benefited from the law.

Nope. If the user must be asked to accept tracking cookies, then the tracking cookies should not be created, if the user doesn't want them. If the site would create them anyway, the owners would break the law and could be prosecuted.

If you want actual "protection," use a browser plugin that prompts you to accept or reject cookies.

That’s not how modern societies work. It’s the law-makers job to create an environment where the citizens are well-protected from any kind of “dangers”. The law-makers cannot just say: “Oh, you didn’t know about the risk? You didn’t protect yourself? Well, your bad!”

I understand that such regulations might sound silly to tech-savvy users, but that doesn’t mean they are not useful for the general public.

[Makoto]

If the site would create them anyway, the owners would break the law and could be prosecuted.

http://nocookielaw.com/

See my signature. If you want to be fully in line with this absurd, nonsensical law, find a way to block the embedding of all remote images anywhere on your forum, don't use Google Analytics, Google Adsense, media share buttons, YouTube embeds, or any other related third party service or feature. Otherwise, you're non-compliant and a hypocrite.

This topic is about suggesting a functionality that has little to do with EU law anyways. I'm pretty sure there are other still open topics on this subject where this conversation can be moved to. This is trailing too far off-topic.

[Jυra]

Well, that is exactly what the law does. It actually enforces the awareness, so user tracking cannot happen secretly anymore.

That is very disingenuous if you're trying to say all the law does is raise awareness. It takes webmaster particiaption, not just government.

Nope.

If you take a look at the computers of the users you'll still see cookies that didn't have notices. See cookie law video above. I'm not against countries regulating or getting involved with the Internet, but it has to make sense and benefit people.

[bfarber]

Guys, the suggestion posited was about a time limit to delete posts. I am not sure why the topic has drifted off into yet another argument about the EU cookie directive, but can we get back on topic please? As has been mentioned already, there are other topics (several, some several pages long) where you can continue arguing about the EU cookie directive.