| 
I think that branding a post as having lower value than other posts is worse than deleting it, and I also think that should not be up to the moderators (including me). A post should stay or be removed, and there should be no gray area about whether it is valuable or not.
I do not want to responsibility of having to "rate" posts, as this is exactly what you are recommending.
The removal of a post is a clear decision indicating that the post's purpose and effect do not contribute to the thread, and in most cases is anti-productive. If such posts exist, there is no reason to have them included.
I have seen other sites use this form of moderation and dislike it quite a bit. Everyone's voice is equally valid, and if someone's actual intentions are unsavory then there is no reason for it to be included at all. That is the only reason posts are removed: They do not contribute at all.
As was stated earlier, mostly everyone gets warned and helped in a non-abusive manner. I see no reason for the continued inclusion of such posts unless it's to educate people on what NOT to do, which isn't the purpose of most threads.
"Hating everyone protects me from elitism."
|
