Timeline for Was this edit handled appropriately?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2015 at 17:55 | vote | accept | user3143 | ||
| May 23, 2015 at 17:36 | comment | added | Acire Mod | #3 means the former interpretation, not the latter. Honestly, the fact that nobody else (e.g. nobody who'd already edited it) would be able to get involved after locking was not even on my radar at the time. | |
| May 23, 2015 at 17:33 | comment | added | user3143 | Re: #2: for full transparency to those who can't see deleted content, I flagged one of the worst answers after posting this Meta, and it was subsequently deleted. Thanks! That definitely makes the apprearance of lopsided treatment much less appearing. | |
| May 23, 2015 at 17:29 | comment | added | user3143 | Does #3 mean "there was a non-content-related wider moderation issue, and locking was the only workable response to that wider issue, despite your (DVK's) rights to edit the answer being a collateral damage of the action"? Or was the intention of the lock to prevent anyone else from participating? The former I'd agree, was... unfortunate but perhaps impossible to avoid. The latter would be very troubling | |
| May 22, 2015 at 2:22 | history | answered | AcireMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |