'Delete Stub' timer not removed if split posts are re-added to the topic

Hello all,


Inconvenient. Unknown number of users impacted.


Moving a topic’s posts into a different topic, then moving posts back to their old topic causes the posts to be deleted.


Moving all the posts within a topic to another topic activates a timer to delete the (now) empty topic. However, moving posts back into the (previously) empty topic does not remove the timer. So, posts are silently deleted.


I was consolidating a lot of topics into one collated topic, and accidentally placed a topic that should not have been in there in there. This was brought to my attention, so I moved the relevant posts back into their original topic.

Silently, three days later, the original topic automatically deleted itself:

Expected Behaviour

The timer would be cancelled, because the topic has posts again, and is not closed anymore.

To Reproduce

  1. Create/find topic with multiple posts
  2. Move all posts into new/existing topic
  3. Move all posts back into original topic
  4. Wait 3 days
  5. See original topic get deleted

I assume the 3 days is configurable :man_shrugging: . Although, if they were, then I suppose Jesus would have changed the config too.

1 Like

Hi @Sky020. :wave: Thanks for explaining the steps involved.

Would you say this happens often? The timer being set is a shortcut step for a common action (delete the stump topic left behind), but we don’t have a corresponding shortcut for moving posts back, and it isn’t clear what the default should be, as different editorial workflows may operate different in that instance.

I don’t think this is a bug, but if you are bumping into this over and over, we can discuss and see if there is a way to make it smoother in this area. :slight_smile:

1 Like


No. I have been a moderator for a few years, and this is the first time it negatively (unexpectedly) affected me.

I suspect this has happened to other posts - I vaguely recall moving then unmoving topics, in the past.

I suppose any change would be considered backwards-incompatible.

If this is not considered a bug, then I am happy with this “report” being resolved. Thank you for checking in to this.

1 Like