In clear cases of bot/spam posts such as this one, when the original posting includes what appears to be personally identifiable information (in this case, a name and postal address), is it good form to redact the supposed PII while awaiting the post being marked for deletion by a sufficiently-privileged moderator (as I, in this case have)?
3
- Editing a post invalidates existing spam flags on it, so better not.muru– muru2018-01-11 02:11:54 +00:00Commented Jan 11, 2018 at 2:11
- 1@muru I don't think that's true actually. It didn't happen in this specific case, anyway. The timeline shows 3 spam flags, then DopeGhoti's edit and then another 3 flags and the post was deleted. So the edit didn't invalidate the 1st 3 flags.terdon– terdon Mod2018-01-11 09:41:38 +00:00Commented Jan 11, 2018 at 9:41
- @terdon ah, yes. It's rolling back that affects spam flags, not editing. "Rolling back a post to a previous state will revert to the number of flags from that particular revision." meta.stackexchange.com/a/58035/270345 My bad.muru– muru2018-01-11 09:46:26 +00:00Commented Jan 11, 2018 at 9:46
Add a comment |
1 Answer
No, as it is not personally identifying information: it is just part of the scam.
Flag it for deletion.
- I did indeed mark for moderator attention and it was ultimately deleted. However, while I was confident that the name and postal address was not the poster's PII, it looked reasonable to presume it might be somebody's PII, which is why I took the additional step of redacting. Are you saying that I should not have done so?DopeGhoti– DopeGhoti2018-01-10 22:15:11 +00:00Commented Jan 10, 2018 at 22:15
- I wouldn't have bothered. It's a scam; the only victims are people stupid enough to buy it.jasonwryan– jasonwryan2018-01-10 22:21:52 +00:00Commented Jan 10, 2018 at 22:21