Skip to main content

View Diary: Is posting cached links to unpublished/deleted diaries acceptable behavior at Daily Kos? (292 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Deleted and unpublished are two differernt things (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ray Pensador, DeadHead

    because nothing is ever truly deleted from DK servers.

    Unpublished is different, in that it remains on the servers, but it should not be visible to others.

    but it does happen, and not infrequently, that someone posts some historical record that the orignial poster decided to delete for some reason.
    Can you name one?  

    This all started with "what the Republicans did to language".

    by lunachickie on Thu Nov 07, 2013 at 03:41:33 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  To what purpose? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      fisheye, Hey338Too, fcvaguy

      I really don't have time to scour through years of diaries and comments I've read to find some instances of it to satirsfy your idle curiosity. You've done enough reading here that I'm sure if you think really hard you can remember seeing such things a time or two yourself.

      “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

      by Catte Nappe on Thu Nov 07, 2013 at 03:50:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  From the standpoint of the end user... (7+ / 0-)

      ...does this distinction make any difference?

      Deleted and unpublished are two differernt things because nothing is ever truly deleted from DK servers.
      I don't have direct access to the database for the DK servers, and I doubt 99% of the people commenting on this thread do either. We can only see the material that the site's programming will fetch for us from the database.

      From that standpoint, it seems to me that there's no functional difference between "deleted" and "unpublished." In both instances, the author of a post has chosen to no longer make it available to the user community.

      Regardless, it's a basic fact that after one clicks the "Publish" button that makes their writing available to the public internet, they no longer have complete control over that content. They can remove the content later on from public view by those who are attempting to load the content anew, but they cannot control the choices of those who already loaded the content when it was public.

      If someone loaded and saved/cached the content while it was public, the person who published the content does not have the power to demand that the person who saved that content delete it. The person who published the material chose to make the content available to the public the second they clicked "Publish."

      For those who know that they are inclined to rethink their words from time to time, it would behoove them to consider that fact carefully before choosing to click the "Publish" button.

      "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

      by JamesGG on Thu Nov 07, 2013 at 04:29:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Excellent comment. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        serendipityisabitch, Hey338Too, kurt

        © grover


        So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

        by grover on Thu Nov 07, 2013 at 07:40:10 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, but that is not the issue here. Again, simple (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DeadHead

        question... If you publish a diary and within minutes unpublish it or delete it, would you be okay if somebody posted a link to a cached copy of the diary in a totally unrelated comment thread with no explanation? Would you be so kind as to answer that?

        •  Let's define "okay" here. (7+ / 0-)

          Would I like that it happened? Of course not.

          But in this hypothetical, I was the one who clicked "Publish" in the first place. I made the choice to publish it, knowing full well that when I clicked that button, I was taking an action that I might not be able to fully undo.

          You're not the only one who's posted something to the internet and almost immediately—maybe even before clicking "Submit"—thought "oh shit, I shouldn't have done that."

          Hell, I've lost count of the number of times that I knew when I was clicking the preview button that I was going to regret clicking "Submit." When I'm thinking clearly about my actions, that knowledge usually leads me to click "Cancel." Occasionally, when I'm not thinking clearly or I'm in one of those "what the hell" moods, I click "Submit"—and my prediction of regret has tended, more often than not, to be vindicated.

          So, would I be "okay" with someone throwing a comment or post back in my face that I regretted writing? Of course not. But that doesn't mean that I'd consider it a grave violation of the rules, a matter of etiquette worth starting a meta pie-fight over. I'd kick myself for publishing the damn thing in the first place and take it as a lesson learned, to do a little more reflection before clicking "Publish" next time.

          As an aside, I might add that the first rule of holes is "stop digging"—and with this post, I daresay you've drawn a hundred times as many eyeballs to the post you wish you could delete from the world, than you would have if you had chosen to just let it go. Somehow, I doubt that was your intended purpose in writing this.

          "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

          by JamesGG on Thu Nov 07, 2013 at 08:11:16 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thank you for finally answering. The (0+ / 0-)

            hypotheticals are totally irrelevant as it related to this diary.  I'm not sure if you read it, or read the poll question.

            •  You created the hypothetical. (3+ / 0-)

              I quote your own comment, the very comment to which I was replying:

              If you publish a diary and within minutes unpublish it or delete it, would you be okay if somebody posted a link to a cached copy of the diary in a totally unrelated comment thread with no explanation?
              That did not happen to me. Therefore, if I am the "you" to which you refer in that comment—which I can only assume I am, since your comment was a reply to me—it is a hypothetical situation.

              "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

              by JamesGG on Thu Nov 07, 2013 at 08:30:20 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  This is getting truly bizarre by now. That (0+ / 0-)

                situation happened exactly as I describe it.  Since you seemed not to understand the point, I just posited the question to you personally; how would you feel if that was done to you?

                Either way, the situation, and this diary are not based on semantics, what-ifs, or hypotheticals.

                Instead of posting long-winded stuff about all kinds of unrelated what-ifs, you could just have answered the question asked in this diary?

                •  You missed my point, yet again. (5+ / 0-)
                  Since you seemed not to understand the point, I just posited the question to you personally; how would you feel if that was done to you?
                  But it has not been done to me.

                  Since I have never personally experienced that, I can only hypothesize about how I would feel about it and what lessons I might learn from it—a question I did, in fact, answer upthread, despite your insistence that I have not answered it.* Therefore, for me, it is a hypothetical situation.

                  * The fact that my answer was not the moral outrage you seemed to desire does not mean I failed to answer the question; if you find my answer insufficient as a response to the question, please do feel free to point out exactly how, preferably with blockquotes.

                  "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

                  by JamesGG on Thu Nov 07, 2013 at 08:51:44 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

    •  Sorry - once you publish (5+ / 0-)

      you allow it to be read and saved by everyone in the world with an internet connection.

      If that is what you mean by an "unpublished" diary.  One that has been published and then "unpublished".  The diarist has not made that clear.

      Once a diary has been published, there really is no going back.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site