Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Meta

Should a fake user's posts be deleted if the fake user has subsequently been deleted by the site

+1
−1

The question below was raised by a "new user". The identity of the "new user" was deleted because it was found to be an alias of an already suspended user: -

Image alt text

So, why is the question still active? It's a fake user created by a suspended user!!

Shouldn't the question be "locked" so that no further answers are permissible? Remember, this is a fake account set-up by an already suspended user.

Maybe the question is "good enough" (irrespective of the fake user being deleted) and should remain? However, if the question does remain and, the suspended user gains a benefit from further answers (as an onlooker), is that a good and decent thing? Personally I think not.

So, should a suspended user (who creates an alias username to ask a new question) benefit from future answers to the fake-user question?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

1 answer

+4
−0

It's a balance.

On one had, we want to be a store of knowledge. It doesn't matter what prompted a particular piece of information to be posted if it serves the long term purpose. We also don't want volunteers that wrote answers in good faith feel like they wasted their time because the original asker turned out to be fake.

On the other hand, we certainly don't want to encourage people creating fake accounts. Not getting the desired result is one way to avoid encouraging such users.

Deleting the offending user is an obvious thing to do, and was done in this case. That leaves the question of what to do with the content that resulted from that user's actions. In this case, since an answer had already been written and there was some discussion in comments, I left the question and answer. In other cases where there was no answer, I deleted the whole question.

I admit I'm somewhat on the fence about deleting the whole question in more cases myself.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

The other place acts so swiftly (3 comments)

Sign up to answer this question »