I agree.
- The system should minimize instances where it automatically modifies user input.
- If you feel that the system should automatically modify user input, it should allow the user to override. Not allowing the user to override is offensive. Let the user say what they want to say, and if it's a problem, address it by moderation.
- If there is no mechanism to allow the user to override the system, at the very least will you please make it provide visible feedback (1) that it is doing so intentionally, and (2) why it is doing so. Otherwise you not only have a system that is not only inflexible and offensive, but also extremely confusing.
...and if the sysadmins maintain this as status-declined, then what I'll do is stop using "@" signs, because it just causes annoyance, and I don't want the system automatically censoring my comments.
And just for kicks, let's compare these two possibilities.
Lorem ipsum, etc.
--Fooman
That doesn't look right. --Barman
@Barman: Are you sure? --Fooman
@Fooman: Yes, I am. See "Book of Lorem Ipsum" p. 302 --Barman
@Barman: OK, if you insist. --Fooman
or this:
Lorem ipsum, etc.
--Fooman
That doesn't look right. --Barman
@Barman: Are you sure? --Fooman
Yes, I am. See "Book of Lorem Ipsum" p. 302 --Barman
@Barman: OK, if you insist. --Fooman
The first of these is symmetric, the second is not. It is really strange, when someone writes a comment to you with your @username, to be completely unable to respond in kind, without any explanation by the system whatsoever why your use of @username is removed but the other guy's is not.
If some of you think this is excessively noisy, then let it be a client-side preference to remove the @name syntax. But don't change the source comment. If I want to make it clear who I'm talking to, let me do it.
