Re: Proposal: Nuke negative comments

On Tue, May 10, 2022, at 4:46 PM, Daniel P. Brown wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 5:28 PM Larry Garfield <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> I'm fine with some slightly stricter threshold for purging (-5, or -1 but also at least X months old, or whatever).  No strong preference here.
>
>     This is another good idea of which I didn't think.  I've removed
> thousands of notes that were using coding styles that had deprecated
> functions and other such detrimental qualities over the years, but
> making a point to check - at least after EOLs and major releases - is
> probably a really good idea, Larry.
>
>> .... (I never use Windows, so I have no idea if it's valuable or misleading.)
>
>     Hear, hear.  Over a hundred devices (servers included) in our
> house, and - aside from the as/when needed spin-up of a Windows VM -
> not a single Microsoft product.  Nothing against it, like I used to be
> in the nineties and early aughts, but this was one of my feelings
> toward what Chris pointed out, specifically, about a heavily-downvoted
> Windows-based function notes.  Was it because there were factual,
> programmatic design errors, or just pseudo-/cyber-cultural bias?
>
>> To Dan's point, I am happy to discuss better options than this sledgehammer.  Mainly I'm just trying to improve the signal to noise ratio to make the janitorial work easier and more productive.  But I don't want a mythical future solution to block a simple and easy one now, either.  (Having a stricter one-time purge rule could still leave us sufficient data to test more nuanced tools in the future.)
>
>     We stand in agreement here.  Considering the consistent amount of
> posts and voting on the user notes, it's likely to be substantial
> enough to outweigh the current state of disrepair it's in now.
>
>     Regardless of opinions and turnout, though, I have to thank you,
> Larry, for bringing up the point.  Because fully-manual intervention
> just isn't a reasonable approach anymore, and it's becoming a
> hinderance to the quality of the documentation as a whole.

So can we proceed here?  Only a select few have access to run any mass-purge like we've been discussing (which is good), so those few, are you open to it?  What deletion rule would we want to go with?

--Larry Garfield