Anonymous ID: 6d54ad Feb. 20, 2024, 3:59 p.m. No.20448517   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8693

>>20448472

>>20448474

If the reasons for deletion or banning were made into a well-written formula, it might reduce the number of deletions.

 

I'm pretty sure you could state in red text that you were banned or why, right?

 

Like this person was banned for this reason.

Is that what should do instead of deleting?

 

It might also eliminate mistakes.

But then would get spam and mold all over the place, wouldn't ?

What should do?

Balance of freedom?

Anonymous ID: 6d54ad Feb. 20, 2024, 4:09 p.m. No.20448589   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8617

>>20448472

>>20448474

If the reasons for deletion or banning were made into a well-written formula, it might reduce the number of deletions.

 

I'm pretty sure you could state in red text that you were banned or why, right?

 

Like this person was banned for this reason.

Is that what should do instead of deleting?

 

It might also eliminate mistakes.

But then would get spam and mold all over the place, wouldn't ?

What should do?

Balance of freedom?

 

If were to state the reason for each and every deletion, we would have to increase the BV.

Well, in other words, are these anons trying to say that there is a problem with the criteria for deleting BOs and BVs here?

That was the point?