My last posting relating to the finite/infinite content of the universe has been deleted without informing me.At least I can't find it.Its not there on the user page also.My current posting incidentally is "On Parallel Transport".

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Some of your questions leave something to be desired, but you sometimes hit on interesting points. Just try to be clearer and terser, it takes a lot of effort to follow your arguments sometimes, and the payoff is often not great enough to do so. It was probably closed and deleted by a mod. What did it ask? Can you paste the content in the question here so we know if it was justified? $\endgroup$
    – Ron Maimon
    Dec 3 '12 at 7:34
  • $\begingroup$ I have an email subscription by which they could have informed me of the closure in case it was closed in a legitimate manner. I have received emails in relation to comments regarding the same posting earlier.But nothing in relation to the closure! $\endgroup$ Dec 3 '12 at 10:08
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The justification issue could have been reasonably handled at the time of closure by informing me. Keeping the original poster uninformed is quite unethical.I suddenly noticed that my posting was not there. $\endgroup$ Dec 3 '12 at 10:26
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The question was definitely not deleted by a moderator; that would have been recorded in its history. It had to be some sort of automated action, as dmckee said in his answer. If you would like to argue that you should be emailed when a deletion of this sort happens, you could certainly bring it up on Meta Stack Exchange. $\endgroup$
    – David Z
    Dec 3 '12 at 17:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Anamitra - 'Unethical'? Really? - there is no ethical reason to inform the poster. Sure, it would be handy, but ethics don't come into it. $\endgroup$
    – Rory Alsop
    Dec 4 '12 at 12:38
  • $\begingroup$ I'm not sure the argument that you were "uninformed" holds much weight. If the question was negatively voted, then that's a pretty clear indication that it needs improvement. Not everyone wants to receive notifications of SE activity through email, although, as was mentioned, this is certainly something that can be discussed on Meta Stack Overflow. $\endgroup$
    – Beofett
    Dec 4 '12 at 19:29
  • $\begingroup$ Voters don't have to give explanations for a negative vote----it is a secret ballot.Justification is not mandatory. Deletion by software in this case is based on such negative voting which does not require any reasoning. And you call it ethics! $\endgroup$ Dec 15 '12 at 0:40

It appears that the question may have been the victim of an automated "bad question" reaper.

As I recall the qualification for automatic removal are

  • one month old
  • negative vote total on the question and
  • no answers

If it is not that I'm stumped as it does not appear to have been done by anyone (including Community who get the "credit" for closure due to spam flags).

  • $\begingroup$ This is correct, although the next build will start recording and displaying that Community did these deletions explicitly. $\endgroup$ Dec 3 '12 at 18:47
  • $\begingroup$ If the software deletes an entire posting with comments without informing the concerned poster[who has an email subscription] I have to say that the software was "POORLY" developed.Proper considerations were missing while creating the software.The "software" did not notify the moderators of the deletion nor did it register the date of deletion. $\endgroup$ Dec 4 '12 at 10:41
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @AnamitraPalit This is another feature of the network that exists to help manage the multi-thousand question per day load on Stack Overflow. To be sure, it is not really necessary on Physics.SE, but on the other hand your posting was negative voted, and not interesting enough o have attracted any answer in month. Were we supposed to assume that on day 35 you were going to come back and try to fix it? In any case, the time of deletion was noted (that's how I was able to learn that was 30 days on and guess what happened), and Kevin has already said that the breadcrumbs will be improved. $\endgroup$ Dec 4 '12 at 15:04
  • $\begingroup$ @ dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten: Your comment does not qualify for the fact that a thread should be deleted without informing the original poster[one who started the discussion], In any case prior to a deletion the poster should be given the opportunity to reason in favor of the discussion started by him.Negative or positive voters do not have to provide reasons for their action. Considering a thread to be uninteresting in the face of a deletion stands to a suspicion without a debate on it . Subsequent deletion due to machine constraints as suggested is quite regrettable! $\endgroup$ Dec 27 '20 at 4:25
  • $\begingroup$ (in continuation)Considering a thread to be uninteresting in the face of a deletion stands to a suspicion . Subsequent deletion due to machine constraints(without informing the poster ) as suggested is quite regrettable! $\endgroup$ Dec 27 '20 at 4:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .