7/31    [ no, see, you need to restore the entire thread. ]
        \_ Grow up you self-righteous little worm and stop seeing so called
           censorship everywhere.  It was a partial restore because that was
           what was easily extractable from the logs.  If you want to do
           better, then restore everything yourself.  It was clear this was
           not an ideologically driven edit.
           \_ I don't care whether it was ideologically driven, petty, or
              another kind of edit.  Whenever it happens, surrounding context
              will get nuked.  End of story.  Don't edit other people's shit.
              \_ Yep, temper tantrum.
              \_ Hey little worm, do you understand this is not a matter of
                 any "editing"...it's a matter of a best effort *restore*.
                 You are punishing the wrong person.  It probably isn't worth
                 my time to catch you doing this, but let's not beat around
                 the bush and pretend there is some principle in what you
                 are doing.
                 \_ No, *this* is the temper tantrum.
                    \_ No, this is aggrivation.
                       \_ And this is bad spelling.
        \_ Shrug.  Not my thread, not my posts.  I just restored as a public
           service.  Why don't you restore what I missed, if it means so
           much to you?  Don't know how to run rcs, do you?
           \_ Nuking all discussion as a response to partial deletes is much
              more effective than restores.
              \_ great, now we have an effective way to get rid of trolls
              \_ Gee, and I thought you were just a child throwing a temper
                 tantrum.
              \_ Nuking all discussion as a response to anything is stupid.
                 Restoring the damaged thread to an undamaged state immediately
                 and without comment is the best way to fight childish partial
                 deletes and the typical not-at-all-funny edits on the motd.
                 \_ Not all discussion, just the thread in question.  The
                    reasoning goes like this: any edit (except accidental ones)
                    whether ideological, joke, etc entails a lack of respect
                    for what the (edited) person had to say.  Why should that
                    person be singled out for said lack of respect?  Let's
                    apply it uniformly.  The environment we are shooting for is
                    "edit someone's post -> no one gets to have any more fun."
                    \_ You need to make a distinction between ideological
                       edits and partial restores because a thread was
                       "damaged" ... partial edits, then added to, then
                       partial restores etc ... which someone tries to
                       unideologically restore the bulk of rather than
                       leaving it truncated.
                       \_ I appreciate the attempt at public service, but
                          frankly, if you are just restoring a truncated
                          version then don't bother.  It has the same effect
                          as just leaving partial edits be.  I am not going to
                          let partial edits be.