Title
Journal deletion process - additional step for connected communities
Short, concise description of the idea
If a user deletes their personal journal there should be an additional step to suggest to either transfer ownership of the communities connected to that account to someone else or delete them as well.
Full description of the ideaSome
(
Read more... )
Comments 15
Of course, one big drawback is that, as bridgetester pointed out in my version of the suggestion, communities with good content may be more likely to be deleted, which may not be desirable.
Reply
In the end even those comms would be run over by spam posts and no one could do anything about it.
But wow, you posted this in 2007 already, and still no change? :-((
Reply
Reply
Agreed, very much so. Maybe there could be an option that would make another maintainer or user owner with a mouse click, just so the comm is "saved". Not sure, though, how this would play out rule-wise.
Yeah. :< By far, "No status" seems to be the most common "status" of all the suggestions posted, even the ones dating as far back as 2001.
I'm getting the feeling that suggestions merely exists to have a place to point people to, and isn't actually watched by the ones in charge of changes...
Reply
As a general rule, IMO, community deletion should be a last resort, discouraged, and triple-checked. [Though if a community has only ever been posted to by one person, and that person is the only one who has posting rights, where it's clearly a situation of "This community is the journal for my fic/icons, because it's easier to post to a community than to switch journal logins" rather than a true community such as davis_square, I'm more in favor of owner-control to the extent possible re "community" deletion.]
Reply
Yes, I'm very much for that as well!
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment