Timeline for How to handle user rollbacks due to stubbornness about formatting / content?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2017 at 12:37 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| May 30, 2014 at 18:49 | comment | added | user456814 | @kape123 OK, got it. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 16:11 | comment | added | nikib3ro | @Cupcake Just to add that my second flag has been accepted and moderator deleted his comment. I've deleted my comments here regarding that incident as they now have no context. Will also delete this comment later. | |
| May 29, 2014 at 14:42 | comment | added | user456814 | @kape123 Also, like Robert pointed out in the comment, the Help Center itself specifically states that "If you are not comfortable with the idea of your contributions being collaboratively edited by other trusted users, this may not be the site for you." Robert's comment would have been totally appropriate, given the original picture painted by Cerberus of the original poster rejecting edits to format code into code blocks (which turned out to only be true for the first couple of edits). | |
| May 29, 2014 at 14:34 | comment | added | user456814 | @kape123 is it always necessary for people to assume that someone is on a "power trip" when that person does something that they disagree with? Honestly, I thought Robert's comment was appropriate, until I got the full picture that Bruno explained in this answer. I'm sure Robert would agree too. Not only that, but Robert's response was much politer than what you made it out to sound like. | |
| May 29, 2014 at 4:04 | comment | added | Andon M. Coleman | Honestly, I think this is why adding a reason next to the roll-back button would make a lot of sense. it should not be as convoluted to explain the motivation behind a roll-back as it currently is :-/ | |
| May 28, 2014 at 21:11 | comment | added | Cerbrus | Looking back at the situation, I agree I was being stubborn myself, too. While this doesn't really answer the "What to do in case of revert wars after mod warnings" question, this answer does "analyze" the situation the best... | |
| May 28, 2014 at 21:08 | vote | accept | Cerbrus | ||
| May 28, 2014 at 20:20 | comment | added | user456814 | I do agree, however, that trying to enforce code formatting for the return statements wasn't really appropriate in this situation, since they were basically comments. Having code formatting for the rest of the code, however, is indeed appropriate. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 20:03 | comment | added | user456814 |
This whole situation is just one big misunderstanding, between all parties involved :P. To be fair, the original poster did add the answer into the question himself, which was one of the original complaints of Cerberus...but yeah, the whole thing is a giant mess.
|
|
| May 28, 2014 at 19:53 | history | answered | Bruno | CC BY-SA 3.0 |