[Q/R?] Reporting a deleted post?

[Grenartia]

I was wondering if it was at all possible to report a clearly rules-violating post that has since been deleted, but also acknowledged by its author?

Because, if so:

Screenshot of the post.

Acknowledgement:

New post up on the IC, be sure to check it out.

Edit: redacted. Just taking the piss with you all. Best of luck to you.

[Farnhamia]

Not with only a screenshot as evidence. Had you quoted the post here, that preserves it even after deletion.

[Grenartia]

Not with only a screenshot as evidence. Had you quoted the post here, that preserves it even after deletion.

Even with the acknowledgement after the fact?

[Bingellia]

Just out of curiosity, why won't you accept a screenshot as evidence?

[The New California Republic]

Just out of curiosity, why won't you accept a screenshot as evidence?

Possible image manipulation.

[Valentine Z]

Just out of curiosity, why won't you accept a screenshot as evidence?

Possible image manipulation.

Since this is marked as [Q], thought I might share why here, on top of what NCR said:

Very, very possible image manipulation thanks to Inspect Element / F12. I want to preface that I am not condoning faking screenshots, nor am I insinuating that Grenartia edited the screenshot. So with that out of the way... With the press of a button, and using Inspect Element, anyone can fake what the other party said. Inspect Element only does changes on your end, and it does not alter anything on the website.

Here's one of my posts that I personally edited (the font looks different because I am forcing a custom font on Chrome):

Here's the original post that has neither been edited by me (it's locked), nor by a Mod.

And thus concludes why screenshots can be very easily doctored, even without Photoshop! It's very easily accessible.

[Grenartia]

Possible image manipulation.

Since this is marked as [Q], thought I might share why here, on top of what NCR said:

Very, very possible image manipulation thanks to Inspect Element / F12. I want to preface that I am not condoning faking screenshots, so with that out of the way. With the press of a button, and using Inspect Element, anyone can fake what the other party said. Inspect Element only does changes on your end, and it does not alter anything on the website.

Here's one of my posts that I personally edited (the font looks different because I am forcing a custom font on Chrome):

Here's the original post that has neither been edited by me (it's locked), nor by a Mod.

And thus concludes why screenshots can be very easily doctored, even without Photoshop! It's very easily accessible.

While this is a valid point, that's kind of a technical and involved process, and harder than say, quoting a post that would earn a warning before it gets deleted, and changing the text to something that would be DEAT-worthy.

[Grenartia]

Since this is marked as [Q], thought I might share why here, on top of what NCR said:

Very, very possible image manipulation thanks to Inspect Element / F12. I want to preface that I am not condoning faking screenshots, so with that out of the way. With the press of a button, and using Inspect Element, anyone can fake what the other party said. Inspect Element only does changes on your end, and it does not alter anything on the website.

Here's one of my posts that I personally edited (the font looks different because I am forcing a custom font on Chrome):

Here's the original post that has neither been edited by me (it's locked), nor by a Mod.

And thus concludes why screenshots can be very easily doctored, even without Photoshop! It's very easily accessible.

While this is a valid point, that's kind of a technical and involved process, and harder than say, quoting a post that would earn a warning before it gets deleted, and changing the text to something that would be DEAT-worthy.

GREN IS A FUCKWAD!

See? Its even easier and simpler to falsify something someone said when you quote them than by editing the code on your end.

[The New California Republic]

While this is a valid point, that's kind of a technical and involved process, and harder than say, quoting a post that would earn a warning before it gets deleted, and changing the text to something that would be DEAT-worthy.

GREN IS A FUCKWAD!

See? Its even easier and simpler to falsify something someone said when you quote them than by editing the code on your end.

I think it's more in the case of the post not existing any more. Of course it's easy to verify if it's correct if the post still exists, but if the post has been deleted then it's impossible to verify the screenshots. It'd be great if the servers saved shadow copies of edited and deleted posts so that if a troll deletes their post then the Mods can still see it, but alas.

The Mods however have acted on rulebreaking posts in the past even if they were edited before the Mods saw them, as the Mods can infer from the edit timestamp that the person is trying to cover up their rulebreaking.

[Grenartia]

See? Its even easier and simpler to falsify something someone said when you quote them than by editing the code on your end.

I think it's more in the case of the post not existing any more. Of course it's easy to verify if it's correct if the post still exists, but if the post has been deleted then it's impossible to verify the screenshots.

And likewise impossible to verify the text in the quote box.

It'd be great if the servers saved shadow copies of edited and deleted posts so that if a troll deletes their post then the Mods can still see it, but alas.

Honestly, that would be ideal.

The Mods however have acted on rulebreaking posts in the past even if they were edited before the Mods saw them, as the Mods can infer from the edit timestamp that the person is trying to cover up their rulebreaking.

Right, but there's a difference between editing and deleting.

[Juristonia]

Honestly, editing some text on an image is easy as piss.
All you really need to figure out is the font type and size.

[Grenartia]

Honestly, editing some text on an image is easy as piss.
All you really need to figure out is the font type and size.

Well, there's also positioning. In most programs I know, its easy to inadvertently put text halfway between where two lines would be. Which makes it easy to spot fakes, if the text is showing up in places where it would otherwise be impossible.

[Vistulange]

I think it's more in the case of the post not existing any more. Of course it's easy to verify if it's correct if the post still exists, but if the post has been deleted then it's impossible to verify the screenshots.

And likewise impossible to verify the text in the quote box.

It'd be great if the servers saved shadow copies of edited and deleted posts so that if a troll deletes their post then the Mods can still see it, but alas.

Honestly, that would be ideal.

The Mods however have acted on rulebreaking posts in the past even if they were edited before the Mods saw them, as the Mods can infer from the edit timestamp that the person is trying to cover up their rulebreaking.

Right, but there's a difference between editing and deleting.

I think mods can see the edit history. Not sure, obviously, and they probably won't confirm or deny this because of understandable reasons, but that's my two cents.

[The New California Republic]

I think mods can see the edit history. Not sure, obviously, and they probably won't confirm or deny this because of understandable reasons, but that's my two cents.

I don't think they can. I think the Mods have implicitly said so on several occasions.