Posted by Dr. Bob on November 28, 2010, at 16:56:04
In reply to Re: Delayed posting » hyperfocus, posted by Dinah on November 13, 2010, at 14:50:36
> I wrote a post making explicit profane threats against everybody that would have gotten me blocked for a century if I had posted it. Thankfully I waited a few hours till I cooled down before deciding whether to send it or not.
>
> I bet half of the people who got blocked, if they had a few hours to think about it wouldn't have written what they did.
>
> hyperfocus> I wonder if it could be selectively enacted as part of the early block reduction?
>
> People might be more willing to have a delay than they would to have someone assigned to review their posts.
>
> DinahThanks, I think this is an interesting idea. Of course, as you've both demonstrated, posters can already choose to delay posting. And if they don't, but come to regret that, they can apologize.
But as Dinah suggests, a mandatory posting delay might be a nice alternative to a mandatory civility buddy (or a block).
> this wouldn't be trivial to implement because it's extra work to write a batch job that runs every hour or whatever to scoop up posts in the queue
>
> hyperfocusAn easier way to implement it might be to not making delayed posting automatic, but to require the poster to return to the site to re-confirm it after the specified delay.
Bob
a brilliant and reticent Web mastermind -- The New York Times
backpedals well -- PartlyCloudy
poster:Dr. Bob
thread:964630
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101014/msgs/971615.html